On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Tomasz Torcz <tomek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 12:54:43PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: >> > >> > > Frankly, I'd like to see Fedora move away from grub2 even on x86. But >> > I'd >> > > also like to see grubby go away. >> > >> > Maybe you could start by listing the problems you have with grubby >> > (and apparently grub2) instead of just saying get rid of it? >> > >> > josh >> >> >> My big pain point right now is that we can't have /boot be a subvolume on >> btrfs and boot properly. >> >> GRUB2 and ExtLinux both support booting from btrfs just fine, but we don't >> seem to support it for some reason? >> >> I can't recall the issue off the top of my head, but I *think* the issue >> was related to grubby. Perhaps using grub2-mkconfig would fix this? > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=124246 > It used to work, then it got broke. To spare you from reading all the comments > in bug, the solution was to remove (from Anaconda) the ability to configure > this specific btrfs layout. This solved release criteria compliance, but > left all previously installed systems with the pants down. > > I've been using grub2-mkconfig after every kernel upgrade succesfully on > those systems, since then. On current, UEFI systems I'm using systemd-boot. Is the issue that grub2-mkconfig can handle useful configs that grubby can't? If so, maybe that's another reason to switch to grub2-mkconfig. --Andy -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
