From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RxOYo-0000rT-Im for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 20:01:12 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 632B8E0B28; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 20:01:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vw0-f53.google.com (mail-vw0-f53.google.com [209.85.212.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F107E0ACC for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 19:59:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbbfc21 with SMTP id fc21so323321vbb.40 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:59:58 -0800 (PST) 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 Received: by 10.220.148.146 with SMTP id p18mr12748060vcv.6.1329249597978; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:59:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.52.33.116 with HTTP; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:59:57 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [71.233.105.174] Received: by 10.52.33.116 with HTTP; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:59:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4F3A9FAA.9000504@binarywings.net> <4F3AA6C7.4050501@trausch.us> <4FEAA3B3-0A32-4347-9441-C0E3FE3E1F38@gmail.com> <4F3AB616.4050506@alyf.net> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:59:57 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] grub vs grub2 From: Michael Cook To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043bdfb81af98404b8f20a8c X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmqeLHMLIWs0VHZXkv/lSocvqwH5hMDu3OCH8IUlGU7fKP2h8BFM5ubtq4VLKmeQmwbpt/a X-Archives-Salt: a17f2177-6c28-4f1d-af83-6bb9740f5e69 X-Archives-Hash: 065f2c9284ada6a7b3bba1ab236a75b7 --f46d043bdfb81af98404b8f20a8c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 You can't edit /etc/default/grub to customize how grub-mkconfig generates grub.cfg. Mint probably has update-grub like Ubuntu does which just allows you to use that command instead of grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub/grub.cfg On Feb 14, 2012 2:55 PM, "LK" wrote: > > On 120214, at 20:29, Andrea Conti wrote: > >> PS: If you know how to get rid of any background image, could you > >> say how? > > Remove or comment out any "splashimage" directives from the config file. > I meant in GRUB2. I have another box with linux mint using GRUB2, and > splash backgrounds in GRUB / lowlevel menus or anywhere ("branding") > reminds me of commercialism like Apple putting their logo onto every > product. (They are good, tho, the apple logo is stylish. Now imagine the > iPhone would have a rectangle-like icon with bad proportions) > > > Re grub2: as long as grub0 works, I really don't care if grub2 is > > better, cleaner, shinier, more modern or anything else. > > > > I don't need a freakin' whole OS to boot linux, and having a > > configuration that is so convoluted that it *has to* be generated by > > running a set of scripts makes no sense at all. I thought the days of m4 > > and sendmail.cf were over a long time ago... > > > > I am sure grub2 can be made to work, but for a piece of software as > > vital as a boot loader, that level of complexity in my opinion is > > totally unreasonable and impossible to justify. > > I agree to you in a big part. Thanks. > > Big companies like Microsoft or Apple are doing a thing i simply call > "Similarisation of features for new/unknowledged users", which always > goes in the reverse direction on long-term. Sample situation: Microsoft > Repair CD: You can select to partition your disk appropiate to how the > assistant will like it. You are being hid from all the details, as you wont > understand them any way. > Once you try to do something special, you get problems bigger than > without this 'improvement for new ones'. This is because less work is > being done to the detailed way of doing it, and more to the simple, > which is made to just do one or two things. > Essence: The system is hidden, you only see actions what you can > do (update-grub in our case) instead of the system. This is obviously > wrong because the system, the back-end, takes more than > the front-end. Now the front-end should represent the back-end in a > human readable form and not simplify to fit the least knowledged. > > BUT, i guess (from what ive heard) grub2 is fine with editing it by > hand. And the command does really only assist in the simpliest > matter, only combines all actions you'd have to take yourself. > Thanks for the clearance. > > (If you want to criticise the above big block of text, I always fail to > express myself well.) > --f46d043bdfb81af98404b8f20a8c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

You can't edit /etc/default/grub to customize how grub-mkconfig gene= rates grub.cfg. Mint probably has update-grub like Ubuntu does which just a= llows you to use that command instead of grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub/grub.= cfg

On Feb 14, 2012 2:55 PM, "LK" <linuxrocksrulers@googlemail.= com> wrote:

On 120214, at 20:29, Andrea Conti wrote:
>> PS: If you know how to get rid of any background image, could you<= br> >> say how?
> Remove or comment out any "splashimage" directives from the = config file.
I meant in GRUB2. I have another box with linux mint using GRUB2, and splas= h backgrounds in GRUB / lowlevel menus or anywhere ("branding") r= eminds me of commercialism like Apple putting their logo onto every product= . (They are good, tho, the apple logo is stylish. Now imagine the iPhone wo= uld have a rectangle-like icon with bad proportions)

> Re grub2: as long as grub0 works, I really don't care if grub2 is<= br> > better, cleaner, shinier, more modern or anything else.
>
> I don't need a freakin' whole OS to boot linux, and having a > configuration that is so convoluted that it *has to* be generated by > running a set of scripts makes no sense at all. I thought the days of = m4
> and sendmail.cf w= ere over a long time ago...
>
> I am sure grub2 can be made to work, but for a piece of software as > vital as a boot loader, that level of complexity in my opinion is
> totally unreasonable and impossible to justify.

I agree to you in a big part. Thanks.

Big companies like Microsoft or Apple are doing a thing i simply call
"Similarisation of features for new/unknowledged users", which al= ways
goes in the reverse direction on long-term. Sample situation: Microsoft
Repair CD: You can select to partition your disk appropiate to how the
assistant will like it. You are being hid from all the details, as you wont=
understand them any way.
=A0 Once you try to do something special, you get problems bigger than
without this 'improvement for new ones'. This is because less work = is
being done to the detailed way of doing it, and more to the simple,
which is made to just do one or two things.
=A0 Essence: The system is hidden, you only see actions what you can
do (update-grub in our case) instead of the system. This is obviously
wrong because the system, the back-end, takes more than
the front-end. Now the front-end should represent the back-end in a
human readable form and not simplify to fit the least knowledged.

BUT, i guess (from what ive heard) grub2 is fine with editing it by
hand. And the command does really only assist in the simpliest
matter, only combines all actions you'd have to take yourself.
Thanks for the clearance.

(If you want to criticise the above big block of text, I always fail to
express myself well.)
--f46d043bdfb81af98404b8f20a8c--