On 05/02/13 00:09, Yamaban wrote:

On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:54, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

On 02/04/2013 09:19 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

http://www.efytimes.com/e1/fullnews.asp?edid=99636

Grub2 will be used on machines that have no UEFI boot, that is. most less-than-current hardware.

It is *not* dead, it is just that grub will not be used when a dramatically simple solution like gummiboot is available.

True. Basil, please show us a bootloader as simple as gummiboot for normal BIOS and you will be the hero of many.

OK, so what this gummiboot is about is all to do with UEFI and will not work if the motherboard does not have UEFI - is this correct? If so and as my mobo does have UEFI, which I have switched off, I can use gummiboot with impunity, right? [pruned] BC -- Using openSUSE 12.2 x86_64 KDE 4.10.0 & kernel 3.7.5-1 on a system with- AMD FX 8-core 3.6/4.2GHz processor 16GB PC14900/1866MHz Quad Channel Corsair "Vengeance" RAM Gigabyte AMD3+ m/board; Gigabyte nVidia GTX550Ti 1GB DDR5 GPU -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

* Yamaban [2013-02-04 14:10]:

On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:54, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

On 02/04/2013 09:19 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

http://www.efytimes.com/e1/fullnews.asp?edid=99636

Grub2 will be used on machines that have no UEFI boot, that is. most less-than-current hardware.

It is *not* dead, it is just that grub will not be used when a dramatically simple solution like gummiboot is available.

True. Basil, please show us a bootloader as simple as gummiboot for normal BIOS and you will be the hero of many.

There are many days were I would prefer LILO over Grub (1 or 2).

A question to the more knowledgeable: Would "syslinux" derivate "extlinux" [1] be able to fill this role?

It already fills this role for probably 95% of all usecases*. It doesn't have extensive filesystem support (only ext4 and btrfs) but then you can use a boot partition as with grub1. [*] notable exceptions are TPM support which I use and which is only supported by TrustedGRUB, a fork of grub1, and support for EFI, but that is already in the works for syslinux as well; so the overengineered monstrosity that is grub2 is pretty redundant and hopefully soon completely irrelevant -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

grub2 - in my experience - is picky, very inconsistent, and very complicated. Just look at it's configuration file!

Why would I even care? Grub 2 in current opensuse and opensuse factory (mind the list topic!) just works by running yast or one command line utility which does not even require any parameters. That's it. It deals with multiple (3+) hard disks, multiple OS (Linuxes, BSDs, Windows versions) and does its job. When it doesn't, we should discuss bug reports. We're in feature freeze for the upcoming opensuse and I think it is a bad time for generic discussions on this list... One could get the impression that we do not have viable means to boot opensuse factory by reading the recent rant threads. That's simply not how it is.

However, in all honestly, why don't we just add support for grubby?

Nobody stops you from submitting patches. - -- Ralf Lang Linux Consultant / Developer Tel.: +49-170-6381563 Mail: lang@b1-systems.de B1 Systems GmbH Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlEPykEACgkQCs1dsHJ/X7A1qwCfYReUjn2SUiv0tWpIGBhafQJe M1EAn14F8lNaMizTY7vJTWqPfvEESj+6 =xhvR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

...

...

However, in all honestly, why don't we just add support for grubby? Nobody stops you from submitting patches.

PLEASE, will people like you stop coming up with these inane and most stupid statements: "Nobody stops you from submitting patches."

There are people who are NOT programmers and unable to submit anything other than a comment as a *user* of the openSUSE operating system.

It is totally OK if somebody is not a programmer and only a user. Sometimes even better than the other way around ;) I just wanted to remind that we are in feature freeze: The people already involved have roughly decided what's in (by not being on time with other features they would have liked to have in) and now it's about finding bugs, broken former use cases and the likes. It's not the time to divert resources and fix what is not broken. What is broken deserves a bug report. Let's discuss these. Where and when under what specific circumstances do the booting solutions provided by opensuse factory (grub, grub2, grub2-efi, some lilo, some more) not work? If these reports are rolling in, those who CAN program can fix bugs on time or decide that they need a last minute effort to bring something fundamentally different in. But probably, this won't happen. Some people don't add bug reports with reproducible scenarios.

Christ, one would have thought that someone like you would know better! :-( Let's be fair:

How do the last two "I don't like grub2 and everybody must know" threads add to making openSUSE Factory (for 12.3) work better? They offer people the choice to either spend time reading your generic criticism of grub2 over and over again (which is time taken away from bug fixing) or killing the topic (or the user) from their read list. It may all be right what you are saying about grub2 config files or its architecture but it does not make the next openSUSE coming out in march any better. I think openSUSE has a place for generic feature wishes or for "next big thing" decisions. But I do not think that this list at this time is the right place. - -- Ralf Lang Linux Consultant / Developer Tel.: +49-170-6381563 Mail: lang@b1-systems.de B1 Systems GmbH Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlEQyI4ACgkQCs1dsHJ/X7DqAwCg8J2xDT0admJo+UYzmFdPxE/j 5AQAoNYsQPGRzKuPXCrc5pKoVUZRHGoJ =Y5jA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

В Mon, 04 Feb 2013 23:39:00 -0300 Cristian Rodríguez пишет:

El 04/02/13 10:54, Guido Berhoerster escribió:

...

It doesn't have extensive filesystem support (only ext4 and btrfs)

Cool, that's a nice feature, not a limitation, having support for two modern filesystems working is much better than half a dozen barely running ;)

Is it based on actual code review? I am genuinely interested in which respect extlinux support for ext[234]/btrfs is better. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

* Basil Chupin [2013-02-05 07:13]:

On 05/02/13 00:54, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...

* Yamaban [2013-02-04 14:10]:

...

On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:54, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

On 02/04/2013 09:19 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

http://www.efytimes.com/e1/fullnews.asp?edid=99636

Grub2 will be used on machines that have no UEFI boot, that is. most less-than-current hardware.

It is *not* dead, it is just that grub will not be used when a dramatically simple solution like gummiboot is available. True. Basil, please show us a bootloader as simple as gummiboot for normal BIOS and you will be the hero of many.

There are many days were I would prefer LILO over Grub (1 or 2).

A question to the more knowledgeable: Would "syslinux" derivate "extlinux" [1] be able to fill this role? It already fills this role for probably 95% of all usecases*. It doesn't have extensive filesystem support (only ext4 and btrfs) but then you can use a boot partition as with grub1.

[*] notable exceptions are TPM support which I use and which is only supported by TrustedGRUB, a fork of grub1, and support for EFI, but that is already in the works for syslinux as well; so the overengineered monstrosity that is grub2 is pretty redundant and hopefully soon completely irrelevant

The best description of grub2 I have seen: "overengineered monstrosity".

But you know, all this is now *REALLY* confusing the whole picture - now there is TrustedGRUB :'( .

TrustedGRUB is a fork which adds support for a TPM and can basically verify the integrity of the system if you have the necessary hardware, I haven't looked into the details but from what I understand UEFI secure boot might be able to provide the same functionality. TrustedGRUB has always been there along grub1 in openSUSE and supported by YaST without you noticing, both are forks of the original grub1 codebase. TrustedGRUB was forked because upstream refused to integrate any TPM support for irrational reasons while grub1 had to be forked as upstream abandoned the grub1 codebase about 7 years ago while they were busy starting over with grub2 which had its first stable release this year. Hope that clears it up a bit. -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

* Frederic Crozat [2013-02-05 10:24]:

Le mardi 05 février 2013 à 10:20 +0100, Guido Berhoerster a écrit :

...

* Basil Chupin [2013-02-05 07:13]:

...

On 05/02/13 00:54, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...

* Yamaban [2013-02-04 14:10]:

...

On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:54, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

On 02/04/2013 09:19 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:

>http://www.efytimes.com/e1/fullnews.asp?edid=99636

Grub2 will be used on machines that have no UEFI boot, that is. most less-than-current hardware.

It is *not* dead, it is just that grub will not be used when a dramatically simple solution like gummiboot is available. True. Basil, please show us a bootloader as simple as gummiboot for normal BIOS and you will be the hero of many.

There are many days were I would prefer LILO over Grub (1 or 2).

A question to the more knowledgeable: Would "syslinux" derivate "extlinux" [1] be able to fill this role? It already fills this role for probably 95% of all usecases*. It doesn't have extensive filesystem support (only ext4 and btrfs) but then you can use a boot partition as with grub1.

[*] notable exceptions are TPM support which I use and which is only supported by TrustedGRUB, a fork of grub1, and support for EFI, but that is already in the works for syslinux as well; so the overengineered monstrosity that is grub2 is pretty redundant and hopefully soon completely irrelevant

The best description of grub2 I have seen: "overengineered monstrosity".

But you know, all this is now *REALLY* confusing the whole picture - now there is TrustedGRUB :'( .

TrustedGRUB is a fork which adds support for a TPM and can basically verify the integrity of the system if you have the necessary hardware, I haven't looked into the details but from what I understand UEFI secure boot might be able to provide the same functionality.

No, Secure Boot is different from TPM.

But you can use it to verify the integrity of the bootloader and build a chain of trust from the firmware into the OS, no? Though a TPM can be used to verify the firmware/BIOS itself. -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Yamaban wrote:

On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:54, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

On 02/04/2013 09:19 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

http://www.efytimes.com/e1/fullnews.asp?edid=99636

Grub2 will be used on machines that have no UEFI boot, that is. most less-than-current hardware. It is *not* dead, it is just that grub will not be used when a dramatically simple solution like gummiboot is available.

True. Basil, please show us a bootloader as simple as gummiboot for normal BIOS and you will be the hero of many.

Um.... LILO? Seems alot simpler than Grub -- may not provide all the comfy-feely stuff but that comes with alot of overhead (including needs for alot larger initrd)

There are many days were I would prefer LILO over Grub (1 or 2).

Simplicity has it's benefits... Whereas, seems like systemd has been brought to us by MS (it's designer admits the config files are patterned after Windows INI files). Saw a similar effect on the ID3v2 "standard" -- just so happened that the standard's committee was populated by mostly MS employees... all volunteering to work on their own time, and in no official MS capacity, of course!... Any wonder why the standard doesn't support UTF-8 over 20 years after it was first suggested/introduced (but adheres to UCS-2 (not UTF-16, though MS's implementations will allow such --- while refusing to recognize UTF-8 Meta info). Interesting how open SW is being subverted... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Tue, 05 Feb 2013 17:28:17 +1100 Basil Chupin wrote:

Could I please ask you to send me, privately if you wish, a reference (URL) to the article, or whatever, which contains what the developer of systemd indicated what you state above?

Your reaction is funny - Linda's, rather vague statement set you straight in a conspiracy mod :) Why is statement vague? Could be on purpose, or more likely, it is shortage of mid term memory, which is busy with self inflicted computer problems that are so "one of the kind" that no one else can help with. Configuration file format that has sections so that is easy to group and parse configuration items was used in Windows with ending .ini. It is the best known example of file structure: [Section1] Item1=Value1 Item2=Value2 [Section2] Item3=Value3 Item4=Value4 and so on. You will find such files all over the place, not only in Windows. I use KDE, so I see plenty of them. I bet Gnome is not different. Also, many other programs use them. They allow Item to be two, or more words as separator between Item and Value is "=", which is easier to read then CamelCase, or cryptic acronyms. The other way that is often used is directory.d/ 01-file1.config (with content) item1 value1 item2 value2 02-file2.config (with content) item3 value3 item4 value4 Some people like blue, some pink, and none of them is wrong for its choice, but also there functional advantages of one over the other, when there are few configuration options, then INI style is better, otherwise second style is better, and then there is a gray zone, with similar gain, where one can choose pink over blue, or vice versa. So Linda may, or may not give you reference, but that will not change what systemd developers will use. They have short files with few options, and it is obvious that for their users easy reading INI style is better. -- Regards, Rajko. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 04/02/13 23:54, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

On 02/04/2013 09:19 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

http://www.efytimes.com/e1/fullnews.asp?edid=99636

BC

Grub2 will be used on machines that have no UEFI boot, that is. most less-than-current hardware.

It is *not* dead, it is just that grub will not be used when a dramatically simple solution like gummiboot is available.

"Gummiboot is an open source boot loader for systems using the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface. Developed by the Red Hat employees Kay Sievers and Harald Hoyer, it is intended to be a minimal alternative to GNU GRUB that "just works"—it automatically detects bootable images (including Linux kernel images, operating systems, and other boot loaders), does not require a configuration file, provides a basic menu interface, and can also integrate with systemd to provide performance data."[1] If it "just works", detects bootable images and does not require a configuration file then why need grub2 and all of its plethora of convoluted cfg etc files? BC [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gummiboot_%28software%29 -- Using openSUSE 12.2 x86_64 KDE 4.10.0 & kernel 3.7.5-1 on a system with- AMD FX 8-core 3.6/4.2GHz processor 16GB PC14900/1866MHz Quad Channel Corsair "Vengeance" RAM Gigabyte AMD3+ m/board; Gigabyte nVidia GTX550Ti 1GB DDR5 GPU -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

2013/2/4 Basil Chupin :

On 04/02/13 23:54, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

On 02/04/2013 09:19 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

http://www.efytimes.com/e1/fullnews.asp?edid=99636

BC

Grub2 will be used on machines that have no UEFI boot, that is. most less-than-current hardware.

It is *not* dead, it is just that grub will not be used when a dramatically simple solution like gummiboot is available.

"Gummiboot is an open source boot loader for systems using the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface. Developed by the Red Hat employees Kay Sievers and Harald Hoyer, it is intended to be a minimal alternative to GNU GRUB that "just works"—it automatically detects bootable images (including Linux kernel images, operating systems, and other boot loaders), does not require a configuration file, provides a basic menu interface, and can also integrate with systemd to provide performance data."[1]

If it "just works", detects bootable images and does not require a configuration file then why need grub2 and all of its plethora of convoluted cfg etc files?

If we have rEFInd why bother to have gummiboot? rEFInd even comes with a nicer menu, http://www.rodsbooks.com/refind/ Both all should fall to the category of "(Muit-)Boot Manager" not "Boot loader". They all work by chainloading other efi images, like grub.efi, elilo.efi which performs the real booting task. And if your linux kernel has efi stub, it can also boot by gummiboot, but you have to realize that in this case gummiboot is not booting the kernel at all, but the boot code in the efi stub. Remember that UEFI firmware also comes with boot manager and they offered similar capabilities, the major difference is that gummiboot/rEFInd provide more friendly way for dealing with mulitiboot under linux. That is also say that UEFI firmware boot manager can boot linux kernel with efi stub. It's not bootloader in real, unless you can ask it to boot a plain bzImage kernel in a plain linux partition with plain ext3 file system. Regards, Michael

BC

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gummiboot_%28software%29

-- Using openSUSE 12.2 x86_64 KDE 4.10.0 & kernel 3.7.5-1 on a system with- AMD FX 8-core 3.6/4.2GHz processor 16GB PC14900/1866MHz Quad Channel Corsair "Vengeance" RAM Gigabyte AMD3+ m/board; Gigabyte nVidia GTX550Ti 1GB DDR5 GPU

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org