Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mageia 3 Released, Still Using Legacy GRUB

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Vax456 View Post
    I agree that Grub2 can be hard to use, but I think that's the fault of distributions not making it possible to turn off the automatic grub.cfg generator script and allowing you to edit yourself. I've run Grub2 on Debian/Ubuntu and on Gentoo, and I think Grub2 is much less of a burden to use on Gentoo than on Debian/Ubuntu because it doesn't overwrite your configuration unless you tell it to.
    Yes, that's nice and simple. Distros provide a bit of control, like parameters in files in "/etc/sysconfig" (or a particular distro's equivalent), but I can't be arsed editing files to get scripts to do the right thing. Might as well just edit grub.cfg if I have to do that.

    I like your grub.cfg file. I suppose it's possible to just forgo the grub-mkconfig in those other distros and just edit it manually all the time. As long as you don't install any more distro kernel packages there shouldn't be anything that automatically runs grub-mkconfig anyway.

    I have Grub 2 in Sabayon on my laptop, and once I built a kernel I just did manual edits since. (Sabayon, at least at the time of my install of the rolling release distro, has an absolutely retarded Grub autoconfig. It INSISTED on using that mount by UUID syntax, even for kernels without an initrd, not even using fstab for guidance. It also buries your custom kernel images in a separate "Advanced" menu. Therefore, I never want to run that again because it causes me to have to do serious editing each time, or the system won't even boot)

    So yes, I suppose that I am directing my hate in the wrong place. It's how the distros are using the autoconfig scripting that gives me the pox.
    Last edited by Grogan; 05-20-2013, 12:39 AM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
      What i truly, truly cannot stand about Mageia is the urpmi package manager. Rpmdrake always insists that it has to restart itself to resolve some updated dependencies so the GUI tool is out of the question. And urpmi is so inflexible with queries that if you don't have the full perfect package namestring to query it will always return nothing.
      Yea, the GUI tool is kind of limited and slow. But for searching, you're doing it wrong, you are supposed to use urpmf: http://www.linuxcertif.com/man/8/urpmf/en/

      Comment


      • #18
        lol

        Originally posted by timothyja View Post
        You do realise that this distro was started at the end of 2010.
        You do realise your lack of humour...

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Redi44 View Post
          You do realise your lack of humour...
          No because it wasnt funny.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by phoronix View Post
            Phoronix: Mageia 3 Released, Still Using Legacy GRUB
            Thumbs up!

            Grub2 is a hate spot for me so I'll be letting off some steam:

            Maybe GRUB2 supports EFI partitions and whatsnot. Yes, okay. But it S U C K S !
            In grub1 I can install a new kernel within 30 seconds. nano /boot/grub/grub.conf Ctrl-K a few lines and Ctrl-U and then just modify the bzImage filename and check boot parameters when you use new features in the kernel. Change default (kernel to boot) value if you like. I can do that in 30 seconds.
            And I do that often. (Gentoo)

            Grub2 requires me to read manuals, to fiddle around in /etc (WTF has a bootloader to do in f*cking /etc anyway?!!11oneoneeleven), it uses XML style for configs and uses a bazillion of files. Then you have to run update-grub or some other script to make it actually valid and being transferred into the /boot partition. Because you shalt not edit grub.conf directly.

            I admit that for some setups it might be okay to be so complex and I honor the new support of filesystems or other stuff but I really hate that it would waste so much time if I'd use it. Also I absolutely do NOT need any graphical bootloader. plain text 80x25, the fastest and most failsafe option that has ever been on earth. Also naming schemes... some things now start with 1 instead of 0 while others still start to count at 0. Why?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Adarion View Post
              Grub2 requires me to read manuals, to fiddle around in /etc (WTF has a bootloader to do in f*cking /etc anyway?!!11oneoneeleven), it uses XML style for configs and uses a bazillion of files. Then you have to run update-grub or some other script to make it actually valid and being transferred into the /boot partition. Because you shalt not edit grub.conf directly.
              I'm not sure what you're doing to need that... grub-mkconfig should automatically detect all your kernels. Unless you don't use the proper `make install` procedure. And the configuration in /etc is there so you could fine-grain what the mkconfig tool does.

              Comment


              • #22
                GRUB2 annoys me simply because it takes longer than GRUB legacy to init and then begin rendering the bootloader menu, and then once it has started it's another 2-3 seconds until it's complete, even though most of the menu is just empty space (I only have two entries).

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by garegin View Post
                  mouting iso's in a loop? uefi support? a richer feature set?
                  Whatever happened to just choosing which kernel to boot into and leaving the bloat out of it?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I don't understand the hate for grub2, I've not once had a single problem with it. I rarely have to edit it, but when I do its just a matter of editing /etc/default/grub and running grub-mkconfig

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I also find grub2 too complex and hard to use. I switched to syslinux when Arch deprecated grub1; easy to install and no problem since then.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
                        I'm not sure what you're doing to need that... grub-mkconfig should automatically detect all your kernels. Unless you don't use the proper `make install` procedure. And the configuration in /etc is there so you could fine-grain what the mkconfig tool does.
                        Well, maybe it needs better tutorials / manpages then. And maybe it depends on how distributions implement it. Maybe upstream has reasons to do certain things and e.g. require /etc to be touched and stuff like that but I don't get their point. I still prefer the simplicity of grub1 that just lets me do things in an instant an that seems to be more failsafe.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
                          I don't understand the hate for grub2, I've not once had a single problem with it. I rarely have to edit it, but when I do its just a matter of editing /etc/default/grub and running grub-mkconfig
                          Try dual booting a dm-raid setup, you will understand the hate then.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Absolutely love Mageia 3

                            My 2cts:
                            No thrills, not whistles but absolutely rock solid!
                            Off course not bleeding edge but fairly up to date too!
                            best kde distro I know ( way better then mint, kubuntu or whatever)

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                              Try dual booting a dm-raid setup, you will understand the hate then.
                              I'd rather sit on a pile of thumbtacks than dual boot anyway

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by DestroyFX View Post
                                And now compile a new kernel and add some boot parameters to it (that resist to updates)
                                The average user does not need to compile their own kernels.

                                On top of that, on Xubuntu, I can update my kernel and keep the boot options I have (no "splash") just fine.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X