On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Chris Murphy <lists(a)colorremedies.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Josef Bacik
<josef(a)toxicpanda.com> wrote:
> Cool so then we use grubby for these other cases and use the grub2
> stuff for the grub2 case which covers the majority of installs and
> lets us use btrfs for /boot. Then as new features are added to grub2
> for btrfs we don't have to worry about some other package being
> updated, we just automatically get them when we update the package.
> I'll take a look at what needs to be done when I get back from
> vacation. Thanks,
Using grub2-mkconfig instead of grubby on x86 was suggested and
rejected primarily on the basis that grub-mkconfig discards the
existing grub.cfg, which can contain user add/modified entries, and
generates a completely new one. Ergo, grubby and GRUB upstreams
fundamentally disagree on the fairly basic principle of whether the
grub.cfg should be modifiable outside of GRUB tools or regenerated
from scratch each time a kernel version or boot parameter change
happens.
That is not the only issue.
If grub itself gets updated and you run grub2-mkconfig the generated
config file might cause issues with the grub that is actually
installed on disk (we do not reinstall grub on updates).