From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24EB41385BF for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 01:25:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D0B2142CC; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 01:25:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net [69.252.207.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3ED3C1428F for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 01:25:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from resomta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.103]) by resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id A1R61r0022EPM31011RJXD; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 01:25:18 +0000 Received: from [10.0.0.2] ([68.60.91.51]) by resomta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id A1RJ1r00B16Uy70011RJMN; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 01:25:18 +0000 Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Grub1: Cant ? Re: keeping grub 1 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org References: <50376531.11846538.1440694215112.JavaMail.zimbra@comcast.net> <55DF9EEB.2080403@comcast.net> From: Michel Catudal Organization: =?UTF-8?Q?Pas_Organis=c3=a9_par_Ti-Mou?= Message-ID: <55DFB86D.7040106@comcast.net> Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 21:25:01 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux Eniac; Joual; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1440725118; bh=JB9bs8Ai8/a33rvieNTmBWcU91y/zdjkEE9IwfupM+c=; h=Received:Received:Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=n+3SRZMDbKSnl0kCpOR+0mAVs204rci1gSNEsVF5gPqRkwI8fhC/7BKqfG4xuekSQ O2ABBsXsK8tJyXo6NSSAvkEIAXss1biEDX1aSu5AN56cqs5cZUqv4HO0FTm49tYMuY 1uMBxVY+xVaDtJveyxrXEJSiVqefruKwXLwnODrMTeLtjcgzeuLDFttTAjVwSGE9Yx Cmq3BDXh8DHeb4klBf6Z8rDl6NYDp9FNLgsgJazQzc/A1BvWwFcocAaKWKWWnh/Ovy AsRNp/vlHSRVlThnoXuc9x2p508fhOAI073vofFx4BBhCJXZPZ5C/P85nA6GfpBmeY 5mlkpPmz44U3w== X-Archives-Salt: 47f7aec7-921b-414f-a0eb-49b0178b9a3f X-Archives-Hash: e455be25e2f5fb8a8a15dc59a4169578 Le 2015-08-27 20:31, Jeremi Piotrowski a écrit : > On Fri, 28 Aug 2015, Michel Catudal wrote: > >> No one is asking them to do that. As mentioned before it works with some >> override. A solution to the problem would be to remove the arrogance toward >> people who want grub on a partition and remove the part in the installer that >> refuses to install it unless you give it an override. > To me they are dealing with this in the right way. As the developers they > have to decide what setups they want to support as the spectrum is huge > and manpower is limited. > > There are problems with installing grub to a partition, read [1]. > Therefore it is not supported and not allowed by default, because if they > don't do this people: > > 1. _will_ try installing to a partition > 2. _will_ render their system unbootable > 3. _will_ come running for help and complaining > 4. _will_ get angry when you tell them `I told you so' > > Seems perfectly legit to want to spare yourself this trouble. This is nonsense. I have never had a case where it would not boot when I have grub correctly installed on the partition. By having each distribution with its own bootloader they do not mess things up for the other. I keep 4 different linux distributions on my computer plus Ecomstation. If in one experiment I goof on one distribution I have some others to help me recover. If one of the distributions that messes up is in control of the boot loader I am screwed. I do not want any operating system in charge of the bootloader, isn't that clear enough? If grub ever messes up the partition that will be because they added some troyan functions to piss off people who disagree with their ownership of the whole computer. >> If I say write the >> bootloader on the partition, that should work as requested, they can still >> write a comment that they do not like us doing it but should not keep us from >> doing it. If it doesn't work we will see it soon enough. >> > I don't get you - that _is_ exactly what they are doing. You say 'write > bootloader to partition' by adding the force flag and grub2 complains but > does what it is told. > > [1]: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1229097#p1229097 > > You missed the point, I do not want some installation treating me like a child by denying an install to protect me against myself. If I mess up my system it is nobody's business but mine. -- For Linux Software visit http://home.comcast.net/~mcatudal http://sourceforge.net/projects/suzielinux/