On Friday 31 October 2014 20:26:57 Neil Bothwick wrote: > On 31 October 2014 16:16:33 WET, Peter Humphrey <pe...@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote: > > On Friday 31 October 2014 15:09:26 J. Roeleveld wrote: > > > I've got a few systems where grub1 doesn't work. This is more likely > > > > caused > > > > > by some changes in used filesystems instead of any other cause. > > > If I really wanted to, I might get it to work, but I don't see the > > > > point in > > > > > spending time on this. > > > Grub starts the boot process and then, afaik, disappears. > > > Which is sufficient for me. > > > > My grub-0.99 lets me choose from four kernels and two or three run > > levels at > > boot time, and grub-2 can't handle this yet, or it couldn't the last > > time I > > checked. I don't suggest that everyone has a similar need, but at > > least in > > some cases the old grub does still have a place. > > Grub2 can do that in at least three different ways. You can write a complete > manual configuration, just like with 0.9,you can put a manual custom > configuration in /etc/grub.d or you can put a simple she'll script in that > directory that creates menu entries with each set of options for each > kernel in /boot. > > None of these options are any more complex than creating a grub 0 > configuration by hand.
Well, it looks as though grub-2 has grown since I looked into it, but as it's going to need a whole new chapter of learning on my part, I think I'll put off doing it for a while. -- Rgds Peter
