Felix Zielcke wrote:
Am Donnerstag, den 07.01.2010, 23:27 -0600 schrieb Bruce Dubbs:
OK, I didn't realize set root was capable of using UUIDs. I did know
that the two root entries were different. I got that mixed up with
the
search command combined with the root=UUID=... which I think needs
Am Donnerstag, den 07.01.2010, 23:27 -0600 schrieb Bruce Dubbs:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 04:18:37PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> >> Robert Millan wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 04:00:23PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > Just leave it with (/dev/foo).
> You mean
Colin Watson wrote:
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 04:18:37PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Robert Millan wrote:
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 04:00:23PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
Just leave it with (/dev/foo).
You mean literally with the parentheses? I don't understand, since /dev/
names will be unintelligi
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 04:18:37PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 04:00:23PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
Just leave it with (/dev/foo).
>>> You mean literally with the parentheses? I don't understand, since /dev/
>>> names will be unintelligible to G
Robert Millan wrote:
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 04:00:23PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
Just leave it with (/dev/foo).
You mean literally with the parentheses? I don't understand, since /dev/
names will be unintelligible to GRUB when running outside an operating
system.
Yes. This just means we'd
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 04:00:23PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > Just leave it with (/dev/foo).
>
> You mean literally with the parentheses? I don't understand, since /dev/
> names will be unintelligible to GRUB when running outside an operating
> system.
Yes. This just means we'd have "set roo
On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 02:25:51PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 10:18:27PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Colin Watson wrote:
> > > No, I don't think we will. grub-probe is perfectly capable of mapping
> > > /dev/sda1 to (hd0,1) even without device.map;
> >
> > I wasn't v
On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 01:37:14PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Robert Millan
> Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 14:25:51 +0100
>
> > Then we rely only on UUIDs.
>
> This is exactly what I suggested we should avoid.
>
> On OpenFirmware we scan every device alias, %80 of them point to
> non-existing
From: Robert Millan
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 14:25:51 +0100
> Then we rely only on UUIDs.
This is exactly what I suggested we should avoid.
On OpenFirmware we scan every device alias, %80 of them point to
non-existing devices. The aliases are just an enumeration of
the set of devices that could
On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 10:18:27PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > No, I don't think we will. grub-probe is perfectly capable of mapping
> > /dev/sda1 to (hd0,1) even without device.map;
>
> I wasn't very fond of this because it's BIOS-specific. But I guess we can
> live with it.
On second thoug
Am Donnerstag, den 24.12.2009, 22:17 +0100 schrieb Robert Millan:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:12:58AM +0100, Felix Zielcke wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, den 10.12.2009, 01:55 +0100 schrieb Robert Millan:
> > > But first we'd need to figure out what we do with the "set
> root=xxx"
> > > backward compat
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 08:12:52AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 01:55:27AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 11:04:43PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > I'm trying to figure out how to make Debian's grub-installer operate
> > > without a device.map; it
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:12:58AM +0100, Felix Zielcke wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 10.12.2009, 01:55 +0100 schrieb Robert Millan:
> > But first we'd need to figure out what we do with the "set root=xxx"
> > backward compatibility hack. Has it been a while long enough that
> > we can remove suppor
Am Donnerstag, den 10.12.2009, 01:55 +0100 schrieb Robert Millan:
> But first we'd need to figure out what we do with the "set root=xxx"
> backward compatibility hack. Has it been a while long enough that
> we can remove support for GRUB installs that didn't come with UUID
> support?
Well we sti
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 01:55:27AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 11:04:43PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > I'm trying to figure out how to make Debian's grub-installer operate
> > without a device.map; it has various legacy bits and pieces that need
> > conversion, and I'm w
On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 11:04:43PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
>
> I'm trying to figure out how to make Debian's grub-installer operate
> without a device.map; it has various legacy bits and pieces that need
> conversion, and I'm working on these.
>
> Along the way, though, I noticed that grub-ins
On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 10:49:15PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 05:25:22PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > Ah, I hadn't noticed r1870, sorry. Am I right in believing that my patch
> > is obsolete, then?
>
> I'm not completely sure, but it seems so. Sorry about that :-(
Do
On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 05:25:22PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 02:28:06PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > As Robert said recently, we're trying to get rid of our reliance on
> > device.map. Right now, it is still necessary to at least have entries in
> > device.map for any d
On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 02:28:06PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> As Robert said recently, we're trying to get rid of our reliance on
> device.map. Right now, it is still necessary to at least have entries in
> device.map for any disks you wish to use with GRUB, although they don't
> have to be parti
As Robert said recently, we're trying to get rid of our reliance on
device.map. Right now, it is still necessary to at least have entries in
device.map for any disks you wish to use with GRUB, although they don't
have to be particularly sensible; any bidirectional mapping will do (at
least as long
20 matches
Mail list logo
