On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 5:39 PM, gt <static.vortex@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Why do you need to upgrade to grub2? Even if grub-legacy won't be in the > official repositories, it'll be in the AUR. Also, you don't need to > reinstall grub every now and then, so i don't see the need to upgrade. OK if the general policy will be that for existing systems there is no need to upgrade grub in this situation that will be great - and if grub-legacy is in the AUR but no further development or changes takes place then that would satisfy me and there would be presumably no need to install the grub-legacy package from AUR? Just continue to update using pacman -Syu? A further question then arises - let's say there is a system on which arch is not yet running and a new arch install needs to be done - but that the disk is pre-partitioned and has perhaps Windows XP or Windows 7 that the user would like to preserve with a dual boot system - and which perhaps has an OEM (HP) recovery partition between the MBR and the NTFS Windows partition with a post-MBR gap of 64 sectors. When installing arch when the default is grub2 - would it then need a larger post-MBR gap to achieve a successful (and bootable) install? (This is for the presumption that it has BIOS and MBR partitioning only - and again no GPT or UEFI) - or would an install along the lines that most people have been used to doing with existing install media work perfectly well? -- mike c
