grub-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: execution of update-grub in chroots might fail


From: Robert Millan
Subject: Re: execution of update-grub in chroots might fail
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 22:28:32 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:56:21AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> The simplest fix is to add '&& [ -e /boot/grub/grub.cfg ]' to the test
> in memtest86+;

Uhm should we make this check part of update-grub?  Or even part of
grub-mkconfig?

> that is, if the configuration file hasn't been generated
> already, it shouldn't be updated. (This check is in the memtest86+
> postinst in Ubuntu.) This accounts for the OpenVZ problem as well as for
> other reasons why GRUB might not actually be being used as a boot
> loader.
> 
> You're right that it is suboptimal that every package has to implement
> the check itself. My instinct is that the semantics of update-grub ought
> to change slightly, so that it really is an *update* - that is, it
> shouldn't by default generate a configuration file if there isn't one
> already. It could have a --force option (or better name?) for
> convenience, for use by the grub2 packaging itself, and for use by the
> installer. Anything much more complex than that smells of
> overengineering to me.
> 
> Note, though, that care would need to be taken to ensure that
> grub-installer is changed in step; it's important to minimise the
> chances of consequential installer brokenness. There's little urgency on
> this so we could afford the time for a proper transition. For example,
> update-grub could accept but ignore the new option for a while; then,
> after the relevant version of grub2 has moved to testing, grub-installer
> could be updated to use it; then, at some later point, the default
> semantics of update-grub could change.
> 
> If that's too complicated, we could just add an --if-exists option or
> something that does what memtest86+ and other similar packages need.
> There are very few packages in this boat, so it may not be worth very
> much effort to deal with them.
> 
> Robert, Felix, what do you think?

I think it's fine to make this update conditional.  My only concern is that
external packages have a mechanism to add their stuff into grub.cfg (this
was one of the key motivations for initial grub-mkconfig design).

-- 
Robert Millan

  "Be the change you want to see in the world" -- Gandhi




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]