Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Grub1: Cant ? Re: keeping grub 1

[Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Jeremi Piotrowski
<jeremi.piotrowski@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2015, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 14:19:29 +0000 (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote:


>>> For those of us with multiple Linux installations on a disk, that's a
>>> pretty big reason to stick with grub-legacy.
>>
>> Actually, that's a good scenario for GRUB2. grub2-mkconfig can detect
>> all Linux installations on a system, not just the running one, so you
>> only need one GRUB to boot everything. That's why distro installers are
>> so much better at setting up Linux dual booting these days, because GRUB2
>> makes it simple for them.
>
> It's true that grub2-mkconfig does Linux detection well but the problem
> with one grub and multiple distros is the need to manually regenerate the
> config.
>
> I give you the following scenario:
> Gentoo + another binary distro (say Fedora). Whichever one manages the
> grub config can regenerate it on updates. On gentoo you'd do that manually
> (post-install hooks?), Fedora would run grub2-mkconfig on kernel updates.

Fedora and RHEL don't use grub2-mkconfig (unfortunately).


> But what happens when the other one (not responsible for the config)
> updates in a way that affects booting...?

You're screwed no matter which bootloader you're using,

With EFI, depending on your setup, you can update your boot entries
without having to, for example, mount another distro's "/" or "/boot".