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 0567513989A for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 16:48:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 96430142A2; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 16:48:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 685891422E for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 16:48:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZV0LD-0001R8-4Z for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 18:47:55 +0200 Received: from rrcs-71-40-157-251.se.biz.rr.com ([71.40.157.251]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 18:47:55 +0200 Received: from wireless by rrcs-71-40-157-251.se.biz.rr.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 18:47:55 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: James Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Grub1: Cant ? Re: keeping grub 1 Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 16:47:30 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <55DE3D41.1050301@comcast.net> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-Loom-IP: 71.40.157.251 (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/36.0 SeaMonkey/2.33.1) X-Archives-Salt: 1f9a4bfe-ec0b-43f7-9817-ae922b697507 X-Archives-Hash: 18abe9d47be5202c63413c20c33d48af Grant Edwards gmail.com> writes: > > On 2015-08-27, Mike Gilbert gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Michel Catudal comcast.net> wrote: > > > >> I've had serious problems in the past getting to to install on > >> a partition and gave up. Is that bug fixed? > >> It insists on installing on the MBR which is unacceptable. Hmmm. For my purposes (That is creating a PreQualifing Matrix based on the answers to some questions) it would seem that requiring installation of Grub on a partition and not the MBR would mean that only Grub-2 can be used. > > It's not a bug, and it won't be "fixed". Installing on a partition is > > simply not supported. > So, grub2 refuses to share power and cooperate with another bootloader. > Bill Gates would be proud. Yea there does seem to a lot of that going around. The good news is there are so many qualified kernel/lowlevel/devicedriver coders around these days, it's only a matter of time before a serious fork in the bootloader/kernel world of linux occurs. It just keeps boiling and roiling, imho. ymmv. > For those of us with multiple Linux installations on a disk, that's a > pretty big reason to stick with grub-legacy. So you are saying (trying to read the 'tea leaves' here) that grub legacy ( grub-static-0.97-r12) will work well on a 64 bit systems, (u)efi with say multiple drives (> 2T) and Raid-1 configs like btrfs-native or via lvm? I'm not challenging what you are saying; I'm trying to figure out what everybody is suggestions to publish the first draft of the PreQualifying Matrix Questions and the resulting valid choices one can infer. Grub 1vs2 is a big part of that matrix. curiously, James