[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: How to get rid of an entry in grub?



Brian grabbed a keyboard and wrote:
> On Sat 31 Aug 2013 at 11:28:53 -0700, David Guntner wrote:
> 
>> Well, I guess that's the default configuration.  *I* didn't tell it
>> anything. :-)  Remember, I started this with, "I've used lilo all my
> 
> Of course you did! Did someone else issue the command 'update-grub'?
> What you may mean is that you did not realise the consequences.

Apparently, we have different definitions of "someone telling something
to do a specific thing."  My definition of "I told it to do a specific
something" involves my actually editing a config file somewhere, to
define what I want it to do.  Running the program simple tells it to do
what it's supposed to do, but *I* did not define that action unless I
made the afore-mentioned change.

Also, 99% of the time, the only time update-grub gets run is when an
"aptitude safe-upgrade" results in a kernel update of some kind, most of
the time it's aptitude telling it to run (yes, I know I'm running
aptitude :-) ).

>> life and know it backwards and forwards and sideways and so on, and now
>> I'm stuck with grub which I don't understand at all." lol
> 
> I do remember it. I ignored it because it is perenial complaint of
> GRUB-challenged users

Guilty as charged. :-)  I'll eventually get a handle on it and figure it
out, just like I had to do with lilo a long time ago.

>> So then, the question becomes:  Is there a configuration option
>> somewhere that I can use to tell this os-prober thing to *not* probe
>> down a particular directory?  I've seen references to being able to just
> 
> You are still asking the wrong question. Look at what os-prober does.
> Does it probe directories?

Apparently not (which again runs counter to the way I've been used to
thinking, so that'll be another thing I've got to get used to <grin>).
So knowing how to get it to avoid that particular partition when probing
would be useful.  I don't know if there's a better way of doing that
than the way suggested by Siard, but it works some I'm happy for now. :-)

Thanks for all the replies - I do appreciate them.

                 --Dave



Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature


Reply to: