On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:24:26PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> > The rewrite does not include any device detection code. The idea was to
> > put that into the postinst.
> That means that device detection would take place _before_ update-grub is
> run, correct?
> Where would the results of the device detection be stored?
> How would device detection be triggered again if there are hardware
> changes (or even if the user decides to use udev or something like that)?
the new update-grub would read it's device information from
perhaps the grub specific stuff should be in the grub.conf rather than
kernel.conf. You'll see what I mean when you look at how I laid it out.
But I didn't really think about triggering a redetection. perhaps
I was thinking that when the grub package was installed it would do some
auto detection and then allow the user to modify the results. That way
people with corner cases (such as raid) are covered.
So someting like:
Your root device looks to be /dev/hda1 is this correct.
Your grub device looks to be (hd0,1) is this correct.
And so on.
if the auto detected device was wrong we could display a list of devices
that we found and they could choose from. perhaps as simple as fdisk -l.
Anyway. You may all disagree and think that the autodetection should
stay in update-grub.
But, if we take it out we won't have to rely on grub-install.
> > You can find a copy here: http://220.127.116.11/temp/update-grub.tar.gz
> I'll certainly take a look (and I expect others will as well).
> > How would that effect the debian installer?
> We would have to review our grub-installer component, but I'dexpect that
> some changes would probably have to be made to our scripts.
> Or is it written as a drop-in replacement for the current script?
No as the autodetection is gone. But it generates a menu.lst that is
close to having all the same features of the old update-grub
> What timescale do you have in mind for implementing these new scripts?
yes, definately. Its something thats been on the burner for long time.
I'd hoped for feedback from the grub community but got none.
> My personal feeling is that an implementation pre-Sarge could involve a
> risk of unexpected breakage. Given the essential role of grub in
> installations, that would be risking delays in the release.
> Regarding my patch for #292274. What do you think of it? Could/should that
> be implemented in current scripts pre-Sarge?
Yes, I will look at it very soon.