Adam Williamson wrote on Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:00:03 -0700:
>i.e. if you decide to maintain your config by hand then you have to try
>and stop your distro doing it for you, and that's outside of the
>distro's scope of support.
I have more than 150 entries in /etc/alternatives that represent explici
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 13:21 -0400, Janina Sajka wrote:
> Michael Schwendt writes:
> > The symlink target is read-only as another reminder that one should
> > not edit it with an editor but only via the fragments in /etc/grub.d/
> >
> > --
>
> Seems clear enough, as is also the unambiguous header
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011, David Lehman wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 22:09 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:25:19 + (UTC), J (JB) wrote:
>>
>>> I think you criticize him unjustly.
>
> Perhaps. I am getting tired of the protests to grub2 and every other
> thing that changes.
>
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 12:03:46PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 20:11:51 -0600, MJ (Michal) wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 05:05:06PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> > > On 10/06/2011 05:01 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > > >>> you would not notice any troubles.
> > > >>
>
Michael Schwendt writes:
> The symlink target is read-only as another reminder that one should
> not edit it with an editor but only via the fragments in /etc/grub.d/
>
> --
Seems clear enough, as is also the unambiguous header in grub.cfg,
until one reads the Grub manual which clearly and unamb
On 10/07/2011 03:38 AM, JB wrote:
> Eric Blake redhat.com> writes:
>> No. cp is not atomic. rename(2) (via mv(1), if both files are on the
>> same device) is. Any solution that does not use rename(2) is flawed,
>> because an ill-timed power-outage will leave the file in an inconsistent
>> s
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 20:11:51 -0600, MJ (Michal) wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 05:05:06PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> > On 10/06/2011 05:01 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > >>> you would not notice any troubles.
> > >>
> > >> Umm, yes you would. That's not atomic, and risks leaving things in an
>
Eric Blake redhat.com> writes:
> ...
> > cp -f ${grub_cfg}.new ${grub_cfg} ; rm -f ${grub_cfg}.new
> >
> > Better?
>
> No. cp is not atomic. rename(2) (via mv(1), if both files are on the
> same device) is. Any solution that does not use rename(2) is flawed,
> because an ill-timed power-ou
On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 05:05:06PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 10/06/2011 05:01 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> >>> you would not notice any troubles.
> >>
> >> Umm, yes you would. That's not atomic, and risks leaving things in an
> >> inconsistent state.
> >>
> >> http://www.flamingspork.com/talk
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 22:09 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:25:19 + (UTC), J (JB) wrote:
>
> > I think you criticize him unjustly.
Perhaps. I am getting tired of the protests to grub2 and every other
thing that changes.
>
> grub2-mkconfig is just a brute-force shell s
On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:05:06 -0600, EB (Eric) wrote:
> > cp -f ${grub_cfg}.new ${grub_cfg} ; rm -f ${grub_cfg}.new
> >
> > Better?
>
> No. cp is not atomic. rename(2) (via mv(1), if both files are on the
> same device) is. Any solution that does not use rename(2) is flawed,
> because an ill-
On 10/06/2011 05:01 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>>> you would not notice any troubles.
>>
>> Umm, yes you would. That's not atomic, and risks leaving things in an
>> inconsistent state.
>>
>> http://www.flamingspork.com/talks/2007/06/eat_my_data.odp
>> http://www.pixelbeat.org/docs/unix_file_repla
On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 16:32:33 -0600, EB (Eric) wrote:
> On 10/06/2011 03:04 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 10:09:44PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> >>
> >> grub2-mkconfig is just a brute-force shell script that ends with
> >>
> >> # none of the children aborted with
On 10/06/2011 03:04 PM, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 10:09:44PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>>
>> grub2-mkconfig is just a brute-force shell script that ends with
>>
>> # none of the children aborted with error, install the new grub.cfg
>> mv -f ${grub_cfg}.new ${gr
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 16:40:57 -0400, TH (Tom) wrote:
> By default, "grub2-mkconfig" outputs to stdout. "grub2-mkconfig -o
> /etc/grub2.cfg" is the equivalent of "grub2-mkconfig > /etc/grub2.cfg".
Not at all.
If it _were_ like that, it wouldn't break. ">" follows symlinks and
would be fine even wit
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 16:40 -0400, Tom H wrote:
>
>> I use "vi /etc/grub2.cfg", which is perfectly reasonable and useful,
>> and is the same as using "vi /etc/grub.conf" previously.
>
> except that there's a big header saying:
>
> # DO NOT E
On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 10:09:44PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> grub2-mkconfig is just a brute-force shell script that ends with
>
># none of the children aborted with error, install the new grub.cfg
>mv -f ${grub_cfg}.new ${grub_cfg}
>
> so instead of not shipping an incompatible
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 16:40 -0400, Tom H wrote:
> I use "vi /etc/grub2.cfg", which is perfectly reasonable and useful,
> and is the same as using "vi /etc/grub.conf" previously.
except that there's a big header saying:
# DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE
#
# It is automatically generated by grub2-mkconfig u
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 13:48 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 18:11 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> > # grub2-mkconfig -o /etc/grub2.cfg
> > Generating grub.cfg ...
> > ...
> > # ls /etc/grub2.cfg
> > /etc/grub2.cfg
> > #
> >
> > WTF? It didn't _follow_ the sym
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 16:17 -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 22:09:44 +0200
> Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> > there are lame and
> > dubious attempts at defending the symlink.
>
> When the really indefensible thing is that you have to run
> a stupid script to generate the file in the
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 18:11 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> # grub2-mkconfig -o /etc/grub2.cfg
> Generating grub.cfg ...
> ...
> # ls /etc/grub2.cfg
> /etc/grub2.cfg
> #
>
> WTF? It didn't _follow_ the symlink, it replaced it with a file.
> The reboot didn't use it, of course, but u
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 14:44:09 -0400, TH (Tom) wrote:
>>>
>>> So, more symlink madness. /etc/grub2.cfg -> /boot/grub2/grub.cfg
>>> and it doesn't even work flawlessly:
>>
>> This is like the grub1 "/etc/grub.conf" symlink; faster access to the
Michael Schwendt gmail.com> writes:
>
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:25:19 + (UTC), J (JB) wrote:
>
> > I think you criticize him unjustly.
>
> grub2-mkconfig is just a brute-force shell script that ends with
>
># none of the children aborted with error, install the new grub.cfg
>mv -f $
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 22:09:44 +0200
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> there are lame and
> dubious attempts at defending the symlink.
When the really indefensible thing is that you have to run
a stupid script to generate the file in the first place.
It should be edited directly, not composed from scattered
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:25:19 + (UTC), J (JB) wrote:
> I think you criticize him unjustly.
grub2-mkconfig is just a brute-force shell script that ends with
# none of the children aborted with error, install the new grub.cfg
mv -f ${grub_cfg}.new ${grub_cfg}
so instead of not shipping an
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 14:44:09 -0400, TH (Tom) wrote:
> > So, more symlink madness. /etc/grub2.cfg -> /boot/grub2/grub.cfg
> > and it doesn't even work flawlessly:
>
> This is like the grub1 "/etc/grub.conf" symlink; faster access to the
> grub configuration and grub configuration accessible under "
On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 12:03:22 -0500, DL (David) wrote:
> > # rpmls grub2|grep ^l
> > lrwxrwxrwx /etc/grub2.cfg
> > # file /etc/grub2.cfg
> > /etc/grub2.cfg: symbolic link to `/boot/grub2/grub.cfg'
> >
> > So, more symlink madness. /etc/grub2.cfg -> /boot/grub2/grub.cfg
> > and it doesn't
David Lehman redhat.com> writes:
> ...
> > # rpmls grub2|grep ^l
> > lrwxrwxrwx /etc/grub2.cfg
> > # file /etc/grub2.cfg
> > /etc/grub2.cfg: symbolic link to `/boot/grub2/grub.cfg'
> >
> > So, more symlink madness. /etc/grub2.cfg -> /boot/grub2/grub.cfg
> > and it doesn't even work fla
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> So, more symlink madness. /etc/grub2.cfg -> /boot/grub2/grub.cfg
> and it doesn't even work flawlessly:
This is like the grub1 "/etc/grub.conf" symlink; faster access to the
grub configuration and grub configuration accessible under "/e
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> $ cat /etc/grub.d/41_custom
> #!/bin/sh
> cat < if [ -f \$prefix/custom.cfg ]; then
> source \$prefix/custom.cfg;
> fi
> EOF
>
> If I didn't want to append stuff to that file, what might
> $prefix expand to? Very likely it is not /usr:
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 18:11 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 17:37:44 +0200, I wrote:
>
> > Just a brief look, trying to learn a little bit prior to the decision
> > whether I want to keep GRUB2:
>
> > The package doesn't contain /boot/grub/ but /boot/grub2/ - sigh.
> > We've h
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 17:37:44 +0200, I wrote:
> Just a brief look, trying to learn a little bit prior to the decision
> whether I want to keep GRUB2:
> The package doesn't contain /boot/grub/ but /boot/grub2/ - sigh.
> We've had years of /etc/grub.conf -> /boot/grub/grub.conf plus
> additional "men
Just a brief look, trying to learn a little bit prior to the decision
whether I want to keep GRUB2:
$ cat /etc/grub.d/41_custom
#!/bin/sh
cat < /boot/grub/grub.conf plus
additional "menu.lst" symlinks, so users around the world referred
to either one out of three (!) possible config file paths. N
33 matches
Mail list logo
