On Sun, 2012-04-22 at 17:41 -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 22:32:48 +0100
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > Are you sure you're not just talking about
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804835 ?
>
> Sure. I'm just reading the writing on the wall :-).
> They spew message
--- On Sun, 4/22/12, Tom Horsley wrote:
> From: Tom Horsley
> Subject: Re: Grubs really aren't very attractive...
> To: test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Date: Sunday, April 22, 2012, 2:41 PM
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 22:32:48 +0100
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> &
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 22:32:48 +0100
Adam Williamson wrote:
> Are you sure you're not just talking about
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804835 ?
Sure. I'm just reading the writing on the wall :-).
They spew messages about it being fragile, they
require a --force option, there are old
On Sun, 2012-04-22 at 12:10 -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
> (Or was till GRUB2 decided
> it was too good to be chainloaded in the ordinary way
> and must use the new and improved multiboot instead).
Are you sure you're not just talking about
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804835 ?
--
Ad
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 09:58:02 -0700 (PDT)
Antonio Olivares wrote:
> Tom has worked it out, but I wonder if he has saved the changes in the
> /etc/grub2/default file so that updates won't mess any of his changes?
That's the other beauty of a stand alone grub partition. I don't
do any updates to it
--- On Sun, 4/22/12, Tom Horsley wrote:
> From: Tom Horsley
> Subject: Re: Grubs really aren't very attractive...
> To: test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Date: Sunday, April 22, 2012, 9:10 AM
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 09:53:25 -0600
> (MDT)
> Bodhi Zazen wrote:
>
> &
> The default is to install grub2 to
> the MBR. It will detect you OS and allow you to select which
> OS to boot. the grub2 os-prober is much better and, with the
> complexity of configuring grub2, most people go with the
> defaults.
>
os-prober much better?
I disagree! with old grub, FreeBSD was
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 09:53:25 -0600 (MDT)
Bodhi Zazen wrote:
> The default is to install grub2 to the MBR. It will detect you OS and allow
> you to select which OS to boot. the grub2 os-prober is much better and, with
> the complexity of configuring grub2, most people go with the defaults.
The o
Re: Grubs really aren't very attractive...
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 08:13:37 -0600 (MDT)
Bodhi Zazen wrote:
> What is it you do not like about the defaults such that you are chainloading ?
What default? There is no default for installing multiple
OS instances on the same computer. There is
> What is it you do not like about the defaults such that you are chainloading ?
I have a couple dozen different OS root partitions: back to Fedora 6 (some cases
with both 32-bit and 64-bit variants), back to Ubuntu 7.10, SuSE, Debian
testing,
plus that Other OS. I like to identify the OS by hos
On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 08:13:37 -0600 (MDT)
Bodhi Zazen wrote:
> What is it you do not like about the defaults such that you are chainloading ?
What default? There is no default for installing multiple
OS instances on the same computer. There is most especially
no default for keeping them all comple
Message -
From: "Tom Horsley"
To: "Fedora Test List"
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 11:14:28 PM
Subject: Grubs really aren't very attractive...
I've just spend most of an evening getting a stand alone
GRUB2 partition to work (if you can call it that) and
I consid
I've just spend most of an evening getting a stand alone
GRUB2 partition to work (if you can call it that) and
I consider myself lucky I managed that much :-).
Here's the fascinating fruit of my labors - a grub.cfg
that can multi boot fedora 16, fedora 17, and memtest:
set default="0"
set timeout
13 matches
Mail list logo
