Re: Name of config file looks ambiguous to GRUB newbies

[Leendert Meyer]

On Thursday 25 March 2004 14:47, Yedidyah Bar-David wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 01:46:48PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 09:11:07PM +0800, Uwe Dippel wrote:
> > > I'm a zealot. To me the correct one would be ...../etc/grub.conf
> > > And everyone with a Unix-brain will understand.
> >
> > And everyone with a brain will understand that if /etc is on a
> > partition not accessible by grub and /boot is a seperate partition
> > which is accessible it just won't work.  And then I'm not even talking
> > about situations in which people want to change the grub config from
> > within different OSes which don't support every filesystem etc.
>
> You don't have to be so harsh. The intention was that /boot became in
> recent years a mess, and maybe it's time to put into it some Unix-
> traditional order. E.g.
> /boot/etc/grub.conf
> /boot/lib/grub/*stage* (or even /boot/lib/grub-$version/...)

Seems a bit of an overkill to me. Usually one needs only one bootloader.

> The FHS says quite little about /boot. In particular, it says:
> "Configuration files for boot loaders should be placed in /etc."
> That's, of course, was written for the lilo days, the FS-agnostic
> boot-loader days. Maybe it's time for an update.

Let me update you:

There are two kinds of configuration files for a bootloader:

  - 1 to set it up       => should be in /etc (FHS)

  - 1 to boot the system => must be on boot (boot can be mounted
                            from a different partition as you
                            already explained)

FHS said about grub (st. like):

  /etc/grub/menu.lst can be a link to /boot/grub/menu.lst

Cheers,

Leen