On Fri 08 Jul 2016 at 21:16:00 (+0100), Brian wrote: > On Fri 08 Jul 2016 at 14:23:01 -0500, David Wright wrote: > > On Fri 08 Jul 2016 at 19:19:00 (+0100), Brian wrote: > > > On Thu 07 Jul 2016 at 23:34:11 -0400, Gary Dale wrote: > > > > On 07/07/16 05:12 PM, Brian wrote: > > > > >On Thu 07 Jul 2016 at 15:18:05 -0400, Gary Dale wrote: > > > > >>On 07/07/16 02:55 PM, David Wright wrote: > > > > >>>On Thu 07 Jul 2016 at 14:39:51 (-0400), Gary Dale wrote: > > > > >>>>The big selling feature of Grub over Lilo was that it didn't need to > > > > >>>>updated each time you changed something. That fell by the wayside > > > > >>>>with Grub 2. Now the big selling feature is that it works with more > > > > >>>>than just Linux. > > > > >>>I guess I don't know what you mean by "update". > > > > >>>If I change the contents of grub.cfg, the effect is immediate: > > > > >>>the changes will be seen at the next boot. I don't do anything more. > > > > >>However the second line of grub.cfg says "DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE". If > > > > >>you do > > > > >>edit it, the changes will be overwritten the next time a debian > > > > >>upgrade > > > > >>automatically regenerates it. The only method for preserving your > > > > >>changes is > > > > >>to update the grub templates then run update-grub. > > > > >No it's not. dpkg-divert. That's sufficient to search the list archives > > > > >for something which has been mentioned a few times but has passed you > > > > >by. > > > > > > > > A lot of trouble for something that can be avoided if you just edit the > > > > correct files in the first place. > > > > > > Let's see. You write your own grub.cfg or edit the existing one. You > > > want to preserve your file from being changed so you use a *one line > > > command* to ensure that. But this one line command is a lot of trouble. > > > A one line command is onerous? > > > > > > It is much easier to edit the unspecified "correct files" to stop any > > > changes to grub.cfg at a Debian upgrade which attempts to regenerate > > > it? One lives and learns. > > > > I *think* I've worked out what this rant is all about: the replacement > > of /boot/grub/menu.lst in old Grub by /boot/grub/grub.cfg in Grub2. > > Was that a rant? If so, It has nothing whatsoever to do with GRUB > legacy.
I was referring to the threads which started Thu, 7 Jul 2016 14:39:51 -0400 as quoted above. In them, I have argued against the view that something "fell by the wayside" in Grub2 wrt the legacy version. Sorry if you thought that I was accusing yourself of ranting. > If you want GRUB to do what you want you write your own grub,cfg. I do; unconventionally, but it suits me. > Stop moaning. Do it or file file a bug, Then stop moaning and do it. I'm the person without a complaint about Grub2, not the one moaning. Cheers, David.
