You are not logged in.
Starting with Ubuntu 9.10 (and beginning with tomorrow's daily CD builds), GRUB2 will be the default boot-loader on new Ubuntu installations. GRUB2 will bring internationalization support, support for newer systems, and many other improvements considering this GNU boot-loader has been in development for a number of years.
This change was announced today on the Ubuntu development list after discussions took place recently at the Ubuntu Developer Summit. More on Ubuntu's GRUB2 implementation can be found via their kernel team Wiki.
At last GRUB2 will get some attention. Is it time to kill GRUB? Although some people of those who have tried GRUB2 claim it sucks more than GRUB. Is that even possible?
PS. Yes GRUB2 didnt build on x86_64 either last i checked.
Last edited by dolby (2009-06-09 08:33:02)
There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums. That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)
Offline
Hmm i have two questions about GRUB2.
1.That he is faster than GRUB?
2.When we got him at default bootloader in Arch?
Shell Scripter | C/C++/Python/Java Coder | ZSH
Offline
well is grub2 stable yet ? ? And what are the nifty nice features
edit:
Ubuntu is trying to be bleeding edge :-o
Offline
It looks even more convoluted than GRUB to me.
Otoh - Lilo sucks even more because you have to run it every single time after you upgrade your kernel.
Got Leenucks? :: Arch: Power in simplicity :: Get Counted! Registered Linux User #392717 :: Blog thingy
Offline
I'm staying with legacy. Why do you need to have graphics at boot?!
urxvtc / wmii / zsh / configs / onebluecat.net
Arch will not hold your hand
Offline
I'm staying with legacy. Why do you need to have graphics at boot?!
To be windozified I guess. But if it makes toasts and a cup of coffee I'll change right away
R00KIE
Tm90aGluZyB0byBzZWUgaGVyZSwgbW92ZSBhbG9uZy4K
Offline
It looks even more convoluted than GRUB to me.
Otoh - Lilo sucks even more because you have to run it every single time after you upgrade your kernel.
If you find another OSS and moreover GNU project that doesnt build on x86_64 i will give you a cookie.
That's like a world record that makes GRUB suck more that LILO from my point of view.
There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums. That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)
Offline
Well, given that I don't use 64 bit software, I don't really have this problem (hence it does not annoy me particularly ). Are you saying now both GRUB and GRUB2 do not build on x86_64?
Got Leenucks? :: Arch: Power in simplicity :: Get Counted! Registered Linux User #392717 :: Blog thingy
Offline
http://repos.archlinux.org/viewvc.cgi/g … iew=markup
http://repos.archlinux.org/viewvc.cgi/g … iew=markup
Of course. They have to be statically complied in i686.. See the scripts above.
There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums. That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)
Offline
Can't wait for GRUB2... I think it looks quite sweet. Unicode, multi-arch support (the lack for now of x86_64 building is ironic), better filesystem support (native LVM), GPT/EFI support, a _good_ scripting environment, modules, etc... more use cases: http://grub.enbug.org/UseCases
IMHO I think Arch should have GRUB2 in the next installer, even if you have to press a funky key sequence or chmod +x a file before opening the setup, or something else to hide it from "n00bs".
Offline
I use GRUB2 for its support for LVM, but it seriously needs better documentation before it gets used as default by any distro. I was very frustrated when I first tried to install and configure it.
Offline
I use Grub2 with the gfxmenu patch. Loving it. The boot screen looks terrific.
As for why? Because it looks cool. Good enough reason.
Think it's a good move from Ubuntu if it pays off, although it is something I would more have expected from Fedora. Someone is going to have to make the first move and GRUB2 needs some attention. This can only only be good for the project.
Offline
why we want to copy the BIG(_small_) ubuntu feature list?
you have the choice already in archlinux. if you like grub2 used it, if not use grub legacy.
Last edited by wonder (2009-06-09 17:00:27)
Give what you have. To someone, it may be better than you dare to think.
Offline
I use Grub2 with the gfxmenu patch. Loving it. The boot screen looks terrific.
As for why? Because it looks cool. Good enough reason.
screenhot?
When everything's coming your way, you're in the wrong lane I say.
FAQ / Beginners Guide / The Arch Way
Offline
why we want to copy the BIG(_small_) ubuntu feature list?
you have the choice already in archlinux. if you like grub2 used it, if not use grub legacy.
The reason i opened this thread was that, if GRUB2 gets to be the default in the next Ubuntu version, it's bound to get more attention than it gets now.
Hopefully it will suck much less than it sucks now in ~6 months. I dont care what Ubuntu does, but whatever it does gets attention, and benefits users of all other distributions too.
There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums. That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)
Offline
b9anders wrote:I use Grub2 with the gfxmenu patch. Loving it. The boot screen looks terrific.
As for why? Because it looks cool. Good enough reason.
screenhot?
Offline
I made my own theme which Id happily share, but I must confess I have no idea how to screenshoot a bootloader.
Offline
Currently, Grub2 is unstable, it shouldn't be included in their LTS version....
Offline
Currently, Grub2 is unstable, it shouldn't be included in their LTS version....
Or Grub legacy is old . It's not easy to support for years to come .
LTS is not intended to be rock-solid super-stable from day one (That's what Debian is for) . It's intended to be supported for 3(Desktop)/5(Server) years . It gets stabler with time as a side advantage .
Last edited by Nezmer (2009-06-09 21:06:42)
English is not my native language .
Offline
Can you disable graphics? Cause if that's the case I'm on. Just realized that there might be a feature for that...
urxvtc / wmii / zsh / configs / onebluecat.net
Arch will not hold your hand
Offline
There are no graphics by default...
Offline
Ouch. My sig fits me.
urxvtc / wmii / zsh / configs / onebluecat.net
Arch will not hold your hand
Offline
grub2 is quite stable, it's even avaible in debian stable :>
Offline
I tried grub2 yesterday and just couldn't get it to work. Probably just me though
Offline
I just tried it and it works like a charm
Offline