7:26 a.m.
I am trying to fix the grub config file so that I can boot another OS
on this machine. I need to play with the (1,3) part- but it is a pain
to boot the system just to change this one file and then to power down
again to test it. Is there not a simple text editor in Grub?
Dotan Cohen
http://technology-sleuth.com/long_answer/what_is_hdtv.html
2
7:47 a.m.
On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 15:26 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I am trying to fix the grub config file so that I can boot another
OS
on this machine. I need to play with the (1,3) part- but it is a pain
to boot the system just to change this one file and then to power down
again to test it. Is there not a simple text editor in Grub?
Dotan Cohen
http://technology-sleuth.com/long_answer/what_is_hdtv.html
2
Certainly you can do command line editing with grub during boot ( the
'e' key ).
However, those edits are only in memory and only during that boot. Grub
cannot write to a filesystem that is not even mounted yet.
To make changes permanent you need to actually edit the text file
grub.conf and save those changes when the system is running.
Also, How are you going to test your saved changes if you do not reboot
and let grub read and use the changed configuration?
8:07 a.m.
Jeff Vian wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 15:26 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>I am trying to fix the grub config file so that I can boot another OS
>on this machine. I need to play with the (1,3) part- but it is a pain
>to boot the system just to change this one file and then to power down
>again to test it. Is there not a simple text editor in Grub?
>
>Dotan Cohen
>http://technology-sleuth.com/long_answer/what_is_hdtv.html
>
>2
>
Certainly you can do command line editing with grub during boot ( the
'e' key ).
However, those edits are only in memory and only during that boot. Grub
cannot write to a filesystem that is not even mounted yet.
"mounted" has
no meaning to grub, and any event it's able to read it at
that time: tab-completion for filenames works.
However, it does not write[1] to those filesystems, and I think that
fairly sensible.
To make changes permanent you need to actually edit the text file
grub.conf and save those changes when the system is running.
Use the commandline to find what works, write it down if you need and ..
Also, How are you going to test your saved changes if you do not reboot
and let grub read and use the changed configuration?
you won't have to make so many corrections that rebooting becomes so
frustrating.
[1] grub does write something to disk somewhere, it's able to "remember"
what your previous selection was, and it's able to mark a partition
active (for the DOS family of operating systems). However, what to write
is determined by grub, not a potentially ignorant or malicious user.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)computerdatasafe.com.au Z1aaaaaaa(a)computerdatasafe.com.au
Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/
do not reply off-list
11:32 a.m.
On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 22:07 +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
Jeff Vian wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 15:26 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>
>>I am trying to fix the grub config file so that I can boot another OS
>>on this machine. I need to play with the (1,3) part- but it is a pain
>>to boot the system just to change this one file and then to power down
>>again to test it. Is there not a simple text editor in Grub?
>>
>>Dotan Cohen
>>http://technology-sleuth.com/long_answer/what_is_hdtv.html
>>
>>2
>>
>
>
> Certainly you can do command line editing with grub during boot ( the
> 'e' key ).
> However, those edits are only in memory and only during that boot. Grub
> cannot write to a filesystem that is not even mounted yet.
"mounted" has no meaning to grub, and any event it's able to read it at
that time: tab-completion for filenames works.
However, it does not write[1] to those filesystems, and I think that
fairly sensible.
>
> To make changes permanent you need to actually edit the text file
> grub.conf and save those changes when the system is running.
Use the commandline to find what works, write it down if you need and ..
>
> Also, How are you going to test your saved changes if you do not reboot
> and let grub read and use the changed configuration?
>
you won't have to make so many corrections that rebooting becomes so
frustrating.
[1] grub does write something to disk somewhere, it's able to "remember"
what your previous selection was, and it's able to mark a partition
active (for the DOS family of operating systems). However, what to write
is determined by grub, not a potentially ignorant or malicious user.
It does not "remember" your previous selection. It does *always* boot
the kernel marked as default unless you make some other selection from
the menu.
5:02 p.m.
On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 11:32 -0600, Jeff Vian wrote:
It does not "remember" your previous selection. It does
*always* boot
the kernel marked as default unless you make some other selection from
the menu.
It is possible to configure GRUB to work the way you argue against.
That can be useful for people with multi-boot systems who want to be
able simply reboot the current OS.
Instead of something like "default 0" to set the OS to be booted without
interaction, you have a line with "saved" to boot using the last OS, and
inside each title section you have a "savedefault" line so the system
remembers which one you chose.
e.g. From the GRUB info file:
default saved
timeout 10
title GNU/Linux
root (hd0,0)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz root=/dev/sda1 vga=ext
initrd /boot/initrd
savedefault
title FreeBSD
root (hd0,a)
kernel /boot/loader
savedefault
--
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
5:36 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 09:32 +1030, Tim wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 11:32 -0600, Jeff Vian wrote:
> It does not "remember" your previous selection. It does *always* boot
> the kernel marked as default unless you make some other selection from
> the menu.
It is possible to configure GRUB to work the way you argue against.
That can be useful for people with multi-boot systems who want to be
able simply reboot the current OS.
OK, so you *CAN* make it do that. It certainly is not the default
behavior and requires modification of every stanza in grub.conf to
achieve what you describe as well as changing the default line. That is
not easy for most, nor intuitive at all, and most would not consider
making those changes without a tutorial or a clearly documented
procedure and reason.
Most people I know simply want the system to work without having to get
under the hood and adjust the dohickey to fix their thingamajig. Grub
documentation is sparse and since I am happy with the system as it is
(and I suspect most are), I have not spent hours digging and trying to
find out what is possible.
I wonder how many people on this list actually knew that was possible
before you posted the procedure here?
Instead of something like "default 0" to set the OS to be
booted without
interaction, you have a line with "saved" to boot using the last OS, and
inside each title section you have a "savedefault" line so the system
remembers which one you chose.
e.g. From the GRUB info file:
default saved
timeout 10
title GNU/Linux
root (hd0,0)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz root=/dev/sda1 vga=ext
initrd /boot/initrd
savedefault
title FreeBSD
root (hd0,a)
kernel /boot/loader
savedefault
--
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
11:54 p.m.
Jeff Vian:
>> It does not "remember" your previous selection. It
does *always* boot
>> the kernel marked as default unless you make some other selection from
>> the menu.
Tim:
> It is possible to configure GRUB to work the way you argue
against.
> That can be useful for people with multi-boot systems who want to be
> able simply reboot the current OS.
Jeff Vian:
OK, so you *CAN* make it do that.
Well, you were rather directly, very assertively, and not totally
correctly, disputing a prior poster:
John Summerfied
>>> However, it does not write[1] to those filesystems, and I
think that
>>> fairly sensible.
>>>
>>> [1] grub does write something to disk somewhere, it's able to
"remember"
>>> what your previous selection was, and it's able to mark a partition
>>> active (for the DOS family of operating systems).
He correctly said it was *able* to do so, you said it couldn't do so
(i.e. it doesn't remember, and it always boots the default kernel).
If you'd said it doesn't normally do that, I'd have agreed with you, but
your prior reply was rather misleading. Anybody who might have wanted
to do what I'd described, might well have took what you said at face
value, and not looked any further to see if it could have been done.
It certainly is not the default behavior and requires modification
of
every stanza in grub.conf to achieve what you describe as well as
changing the default line. That is not easy for most, nor intuitive
at all, and most would not consider making those changes without a
tutorial or a clearly documented procedure and reason.
It's not difficult to do. And unless you never prune out all your prior
kernels (which is bad management), it's not a lot of work. The manual
isn't too bad describing this, and I certainly would read a manual for
something if I was considering customising my PC to do something. And I
do think it *is* intuitive that a reboot actually reboots your PC using
the same system that you were already using, in certain circumstances
(e.g. multiboot systems, or systems used by other people - where they'd
expect a reboot to allow them to carry on doing what they were doing
before, and not have to worry about anything special that you might have
done before they started using the PC).
I wonder how many people on this list actually knew that was
possible
before you posted the procedure here?
Not sure you really want an answer to that on a list which may well have
a huge number of participants...
--
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
2:18 a.m.
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 16:24 +1030, Tim wrote:
Jeff Vian:
>>> It does not "remember" your previous selection. It does *always*
boot
>>> the kernel marked as default unless you make some other selection from
>>> the menu.
Tim:
>> It is possible to configure GRUB to work the way you argue against.
>> That can be useful for people with multi-boot systems who want to be
>> able simply reboot the current OS.
Jeff Vian:
> OK, so you *CAN* make it do that.
Well, you were rather directly, very assertively, and not totally
correctly, disputing a prior poster:
Point taken. Even though the setting to use the "saved" kernel has to be
manually configured it does exist. I was basing my statement on what I
knew to that point.
John Summerfied
>>>> However, it does not write[1] to those filesystems, and I think that
>>>> fairly sensible.
>>>>
>>>> [1] grub does write something to disk somewhere, it's able to
"remember"
>>>> what your previous selection was, and it's able to mark a partition
>>>> active (for the DOS family of operating systems).
He correctly said it was *able* to do so, you said it couldn't do so
(i.e. it doesn't remember, and it always boots the default kernel).
If you'd said it doesn't normally do that, I'd have agreed with you, but
your prior reply was rather misleading. Anybody who might have wanted
to do what I'd described, might well have took what you said at face
value, and not looked any further to see if it could have been done.
I always appreciate an opportunity to learn, especially when it may aid
me in the future. Another case where an absolute statement must be
backed by facts (that I was missing).
> It certainly is not the default behavior and requires
modification of
> every stanza in grub.conf to achieve what you describe as well as
> changing the default line. That is not easy for most, nor intuitive
> at all, and most would not consider making those changes without a
> tutorial or a clearly documented procedure and reason.
It's not difficult to do. And unless you never prune out all your prior
kernels (which is bad management), it's not a lot of work. The manual
isn't too bad describing this, and I certainly would read a manual for
something if I was considering customising my PC to do something. And I
do think it *is* intuitive that a reboot actually reboots your PC using
the same system that you were already using, in certain circumstances
(e.g. multiboot systems, or systems used by other people - where they'd
expect a reboot to allow them to carry on doing what they were doing
before, and not have to worry about anything special that you might have
done before they started using the PC).
Not at all difficult if you make that change as soon as you install the
system. Each kernel update copies the appropriate lines into the stanza
for the new kernel so it is painless after the change has been made.
It is intuitive that the boot should do that. The configuration to make
it happen is what I said was not.
> I wonder how many people on this list actually knew that was
possible
> before you posted the procedure here?
Not sure you really want an answer to that on a list which may well have
a huge number of participants...
Probably not :-)
10:49 a.m.
Tim wrote:
It's not difficult to do. And unless you never prune out all
your prior
kernels (which is bad management), it's not a lot of work. The manual
isn't too bad describing this, and I certainly would read a manual for
something if I was considering customising my PC to do something.
Er ... where is the grub manual?
Do you mean the "man grub" entry?
Or what you get if you say "info grub"?
The latter is much more informative,
but very difficult to navigate through, IMHO.
And I
do think it *is* intuitive that a reboot actually reboots your PC using
the same system that you were already using,
But it doesn't, does it?
Do you mean it does this if you add the command you suggested?
Incidentally you gave this in two forms, "default saved" and
"savedefault".
Will either work?
And what precisely will it do?
Grub is a great program, IMHO,
but its documentation is abysmal.
As for running grub interactively,
this is rather like changing a bulb in the dark.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail (<80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
4:16 p.m.
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Or what you get if you say "info grub"?
The latter is much more informative,
but very difficult to navigate through, IMHO.
pinfo grub?
James.
--
E-mail address: james | "It has taken 24 years to get the Reichstag wrapped.
@westexe.demon.co.uk | Chancellor Kohl said it would only be wrapped over
| his dead body, so sensing an opportunity the
| Bundestag outvoted him." -- The Guardian
4:43 p.m.
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 04:49:15PM +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Tim wrote:
> It's not difficult to do. And unless you never prune out all your prior
> kernels (which is bad management), it's not a lot of work. The manual
> isn't too bad describing this, and I certainly would read a manual for
> something if I was considering customising my PC to do something.
Er ... where is the grub manual?
Do you mean the "man grub" entry?
Or what you get if you say "info grub"?
The latter is much more informative,
but very difficult to navigate through, IMHO.
There is no grub man page the last time I looked but pinfo grub
is much easier to navigate through.
-------------------------------------------
Aaron Konstam
Computer Science
Trinity University
telephone: (210)-999-7484
4:05 a.m.
akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:
>
There is no grub man page the last time I looked but
[summer@bilby ~]$ man grub |
head
GRUB(8) FSF
GRUB(8)
NAME
grub - the grub shell
SYNOPSIS
grub [OPTION]...
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)computerdatasafe.com.au Z1aaaaaaa(a)computerdatasafe.com.au
Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/
do not reply off-list
9:40 a.m.
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 06:05:19PM +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
akonstam(a)trinity.edu wrote:
>>
>
>There is no grub man page the last time I looked but
[summer@bilby ~]$ man grub | head
GRUB(8) FSF
GRUB(8)
NAME
grub - the grub shell
SYNOPSIS
grub [OPTION]...
It shows I should look more often but man grub is still pretty
inadequate.
-------------------------------------------
Aaron Konstam
Computer Science
Trinity University
telephone: (210)-999-7484
5:49 p.m.
Tim:
> It's not difficult to do. And unless you never prune out all
your prior
> kernels (which is bad management), it's not a lot of work. The manual
> isn't too bad describing this, and I certainly would read a manual for
> something if I was considering customising my PC to do something.
Timothy Murphy:
Er ... where is the grub manual?
Do you mean the "man grub" entry?
Or what you get if you say "info grub"?
The latter is much more informative,
but very difficult to navigate through, IMHO.
Personally, I find that man pages are quite dire to use, but info files
take the cake for being damn awkward (about as bad as using Lynx). But
if one actually pays attention while reading the grub man file, this is
at the bottom:
SEE ALSO
The full documentation for grub is maintained as a Texinfo manual. If
the info and grub programs are properly installed at your site, the
command
info grub
should give you access to the complete manual.
So, it's not hard to find out about the info version of the manual, and
it's not hard to figure out what "the full documentation for..." or the
"complete manual" means.
i.e. Probably more than what you're currently reading.
I nearly always check out the "see also" sections of man files, unless
I've got the answers I need already. I've also checked out the web page
for GRUB.
> And I do think it *is* intuitive that a reboot actually reboots
your
> PC using the same system that you were already using,
But it doesn't, does it?
I was countering the comment that *that* sort of thing wasn't intuitive,
where I say it is (i.e. reboot "reboots" what you're currently using; as
opposed to doing a reboot, and something else boots up).
Do you mean it does this if you add the command you suggested?
Incidentally you gave this in two forms, "default saved" and
"savedefault".
Will either work?
And what precisely will it do?
Read the manual, and find out. But briefly, it's done in two parts:
Any item you choose with a "savedefault" command, will save that item as
the default for the next bootup, as well as whatever other commands are
in that item.
The "default saved" before all the items says what item to use by
default. Usually, it's a specific item (e.g. "default 0" runs the first
entry, the one at the top of the list). Using "default saved" means to
use whichever got saved as default, last time.
Hmm, I wonder what happens the first time around, when you've never
booted before and set something as a default? ;-)
Grub is a great program, IMHO,
but its documentation is abysmal.
Hmm, not sure if it's much worse than many other things. (Which doesn't
mean that it's good.)
I really loathe its manner of starting counting from zero. Sure, it
makes sense for 0 to refer to a whole partition, and 1 for the first
partition. But 0 for the first drive is nonsensical.
As for running grub interactively,
this is rather like changing a bulb in the dark.
I tend to agree. It's not helped by having some light white writing
over a light blue background, either.
--
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
5:54 p.m.
Greetings Tim,
Tim wrote:
Tim:
< snip >
I really loathe its manner of starting counting from zero. Sure, it
makes sense for 0 to refer to a whole partition, and 1 for the first
partition. But 0 for the first drive is nonsensical.
Grub starts it's numbering from 0 . Well since computers do start
counting from 0 due to their binary logic , i guess that is to
be expected . Remember for example that BIOS starts it's counting
for hard disks at 0x80 ( 80 hexadecimal ) .
Kind Regards,
Kostas
6:45 p.m.
Tim:
> I really loathe its manner of starting counting from zero. Sure,
it
> makes sense for 0 to refer to a whole partition, and 1 for the first
> partition. But 0 for the first drive is nonsensical.
Kostas Sfakiotakis:
Grub starts it's numbering from 0.
I know that, I'm saying it's not user-friendly, nor has it ever been.
Remember when we only had floppy drives? Some computers with two drives
had drives "zero" and "one", which is sheer stupidity in human terms.
Other more practical systems called them drive "one" and "two".
It causes no end of problems because you HAVE to explain to someone that
it starts counting from zero instead of one. On the other hand, you
wouldn't have to explain things to people if they counted normally.
--
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
9:51 p.m.
On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 18:45, Tim wrote:
Kostas Sfakiotakis:
> Grub starts it's numbering from 0.
I know that, I'm saying it's not user-friendly, nor has it ever been.
It's not linux specific. It might make more sense to someone
used to the bsd style disk naming scheme.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
4:58 p.m.
On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 11:15 +1030, Tim wrote:
Tim:
>> I really loathe its manner of starting counting from zero. Sure, it
>> makes sense for 0 to refer to a whole partition, and 1 for the first
>> partition. But 0 for the first drive is nonsensical.
Kostas Sfakiotakis:
> Grub starts it's numbering from 0.
I know that, I'm saying it's not user-friendly, nor has it ever been.
Remember when we only had floppy drives? Some computers with two drives
had drives "zero" and "one", which is sheer stupidity in human
terms.
Other more practical systems called them drive "one" and "two".
I understand your frustration. However, since computers always start
counting with 0 it was natural for programming languages to do the same.
This is just one example of how that shows to the users.
Although it adds extra instructions in the program (and the extra time
penalty in execution of those instructions) it is possible to make what
the user sees the 'normal' counting process of 1,2,..... as most of us
think of it.
It causes no end of problems because you HAVE to explain to someone
that
it starts counting from zero instead of one. On the other hand, you
wouldn't have to explain things to people if they counted normally.
9:21 p.m.
On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 16:58 -0600, Jeff Vian wrote:
However, since computers always start counting with 0 it was natural
for programming languages to do the same. This is just one example of
how that shows to the users.
More like programmers never really put any good thought into what they
were doing. The number of times I recall having to fix up someone's FOR
A = 0 TO 10 sort of things so they'd count the right number of times...
How many fingers am I holding up...?
--
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
11:24 p.m.
<<How many fingers am I holding up...?>>
10 fingers, but the last one you put up was digit 9 and the first was digit 0.
10 is is to digits, 0 with a one in the power of ten place holder.
John
--
Registered Linux User 263680, get counted at
http://counter.li.org
12:06 a.m.
Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 16:58 -0600, Jeff Vian wrote:
>However, since computers always start counting with 0 it was natural
>for programming languages to do the same. This is just one example of
>how that shows to the users.
More like programmers never really put any good thought into what they
were doing. The number of times I recall having to fix up someone's FOR
A = 0 TO 10 sort of things so they'd count the right number of times...
How many fingers am I holding up...?
Eight, and two thumbs. But there are only nine gaps between them...
Fence post error!
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
2:22 a.m.
On Wednesday 22 February 2006 06:06, Mike McCarty wrote:
Tim wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 16:58 -0600, Jeff Vian wrote:
>>However, since computers always start counting with 0 it was natural
>>for programming languages to do the same. This is just one example of
>>how that shows to the users.
>
> More like programmers never really put any good thought into what they
> were doing. The number of times I recall having to fix up someone's FOR
> A = 0 TO 10 sort of things so they'd count the right number of times...
>
> How many fingers am I holding up...?
Eight, and two thumbs. But there are only nine gaps between them...
Fence post error!
Mike
OUCH .. Fence posts and fingers/thumbs should never be mentioned in the same
sentence!
--
Tony
2:52 a.m.
On 2/22/06, Mike McCarty <mike.mccarty(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Tim wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 16:58 -0600, Jeff Vian wrote:
>
>>However, since computers always start counting with 0 it was natural
>>for programming languages to do the same. This is just one example of
>>how that shows to the users.
>
>
> More like programmers never really put any good thought into what they
> were doing. The number of times I recall having to fix up someone's FOR
> A = 0 TO 10 sort of things so they'd count the right number of times...
>
> How many fingers am I holding up...?
Eight, and two thumbs. But there are only nine gaps between them...
Fence post error!
Mike
Are thumbs not fingers? I have a broken one now- so would it be
inacurate to say that I had broken a finger?
By the way, if you hold one hand in front of the other, you can hold
up ten fingers with only eight gaps between them!
Dotan Cohen
http://technology-sleuth.com/long_answer/why_are_internet_greeting_cards_...
2:25 p.m.
Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 2/22/06, Mike McCarty <mike.mccarty(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Tim wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 16:58 -0600, Jeff Vian wrote:
>>
>>
>>>However, since computers always start counting with 0 it was natural
>>>for programming languages to do the same. This is just one example of
>>>how that shows to the users.
>>
>>
>>More like programmers never really put any good thought into what they
>>were doing. The number of times I recall having to fix up someone's FOR
>>A = 0 TO 10 sort of things so they'd count the right number of times...
>>
>>How many fingers am I holding up...?
>
>Eight, and two thumbs. But there are only nine gaps between them...
>
>Fence post error!
>
>Mike
Are thumbs not fingers? I have a broken one now- so would it be
inacurate to say that I had broken a finger?
Thumbs are digits, but they are not fingers. Toes are also
digits. But if you ask someone "How many fingers do you have?",
the answer is ten. In aggregate, thumbs are fingers, but
individually, they are not. Some aspects of English are pretty
confusing. Like to discuss uniplurals? Or words which have
two different forms for the plural, but with different meanings?
How about verbs which have different conjugations depending
on what the object of the action is? How about words which
are their own antonyms? (That's one of my favorite categories.)
By the way, if you hold one hand in front of the other, you can hold
up ten fingers with only eight gaps between them!
Heck, I can hold up my fingers with *no* gaps between them! Beat that!
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
2:52 p.m.
On 2/23/06, Mike McCarty <mike.mccarty(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Thumbs are digits, but they are not fingers. Toes are also
digits. But if you ask someone "How many fingers do you have?",
the answer is ten. In aggregate, thumbs are fingers, but
individually, they are not. Some aspects of English are pretty
confusing. Like to discuss uniplurals? Or words which have
two different forms for the plural, but with different meanings?
How about verbs which have different conjugations depending
on what the object of the action is? How about words which
are their own antonyms? (That's one of my favorite categories.)
> By the way, if you hold one hand in front of the other, you can hold
> up ten fingers with only eight gaps between them!
Heck, I can hold up my fingers with *no* gaps between them! Beat that!
Mike
I doubt that you can do it with no gaps. I though about it, but there
will be microscopic gaps that you could not avoid. I figured that in a
discussion with Mike McCarty, I had better be as accurate as possible.
So, the idea that the thumb is not a finger is specific to the English
language. Indeed, in Hebrew it is a finger- as are the toes! So while
English speakers have 8 fingers, Hebrew speakers have 20.
How about words which are their own antonyms?
I'd love to see some examples. I love word games- and this may be
valuable. In an attempt to keep this On Topic, are there any computer
(or linux) related ones?
Dotan
3:25 p.m.
Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 2/23/06, Mike McCarty <mike.mccarty(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Thumbs are digits, but they are not fingers. Toes are also
>digits. But if you ask someone "How many fingers do you have?",
>the answer is ten. In aggregate, thumbs are fingers, but
>individually, they are not. Some aspects of English are pretty
>confusing. Like to discuss uniplurals? Or words which have
>two different forms for the plural, but with different meanings?
>How about verbs which have different conjugations depending
>on what the object of the action is? How about words which
>are their own antonyms? (That's one of my favorite categories.)
>
>
>>By the way, if you hold one hand in front of the other, you can hold
>>up ten fingers with only eight gaps between them!
>
>Heck, I can hold up my fingers with *no* gaps between them! Beat that!
>
>Mike
I doubt that you can do it with no gaps. I though about it, but there
will be microscopic gaps that you could not avoid. I figured that in a
discussion with Mike McCarty, I had better be as accurate as possible.
So, the idea that the thumb is not a finger is specific to the English
language. Indeed, in Hebrew it is a finger- as are the toes! So while
English speakers have 8 fingers, Hebrew speakers have 20.
>How about words which are their own antonyms?
>
I'd love to see some examples. I love word games- and this may be
valuable. In an attempt to keep this On Topic, are there any computer
(or linux) related ones?
Pseudo-on-topic "boot" is almost its own antonym.
As in "boot that computer" can mean to start it up, or
throw it away.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
6:28 p.m.
On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 22:52 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 2/23/06, Mike McCarty <mike.mccarty(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
[snip]
So, the idea that the thumb is not a finger is specific to the
English
language. Indeed, in Hebrew it is a finger- as are the toes! So while
English speakers have 8 fingers, Hebrew speakers have 20.
Now I'm an American and I have 10 fingers, two of which are thumbs.
Sorry, I just couldn't resist! :-)
[snip]
--
brtaylor(a)sanfelipe.com.mx
10:16 p.m.
Bob Taylor wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 22:52 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>On 2/23/06, Mike McCarty <mike.mccarty(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
[snip]
>So, the idea that the thumb is not a finger is specific to the English
>language. Indeed, in Hebrew it is a finger- as are the toes! So while
>English speakers have 8 fingers, Hebrew speakers have 20.
Now I'm an American and I have 10 fingers, two of which are thumbs.
Sorry, I just couldn't resist! :-)
[snip]
Actually, I'm *all* thumbs!
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
11:04 p.m.
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Tim wrote:
>It's not difficult to do. And unless you never prune out all your prior
>kernels (which is bad management), it's not a lot of work. The manual
>isn't too bad describing this, and I certainly would read a manual for
>something if I was considering customising my PC to do something.
Er ... where is the grub manual?
Do you mean the "man grub" entry?
Or what you get if you say "info grub"?
The latter is much more informative,
but very difficult to navigate through, IMHO.
http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/
Not sure what led me there the first time, perhaps the README file
in /usr/share/doc/grub* . Just now, I got there by Googling for
"grub manual" (including the quotes).
--
Bob Nichols Yes, "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address.
10:48 a.m.
On 2/16/06, Jeff Vian <jvian10(a)charter.net> wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 22:07 +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
It does not "remember" your previous selection. It does *always* boot
the kernel marked as default unless you make some other selection from
the menu.
Can I only boot from options in the menu? If I _know_ that I want to
boot from hdb8 or from (1,8) can I do it from grub, or must I first
boot the system, then edit the config file, then restart, to boot from
my desired partion?
Dotan Cohen
http://technology-sleuth.com/question/how_can_i_be_safe_online.html
234
11:56 a.m.
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 18:48 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
Can I only boot from options in the menu?
No, you can boot from temporary changes held in memory.
If I _know_ that I want to boot from hdb8 or from (1,8) can I do it
from grub
Yes you can. Just go into the edit mode for the menu, make changes as
necessary to the options GRUB will use to boot with, and boot. What
you've just changed only applies for the current session, you haven't
changed what's in the GRUB configuration file. If you want to make your
changes permanent, you will have to edit the file directly. Do that
after you've booted up successfully.
Suggestion: Make your modifications as a new item in the GRUB menus,
keeping what's already there, until you're sure that everything is
working fine.
--
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
12:31 p.m.
On 2/17/06, Tim <ignored_mailbox(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
Yes you can. Just go into the edit mode for the menu, make changes
as
necessary to the options GRUB will use to boot with, and boot.
Er, how? I could not
find any text editors in the options.
Suggestion: Make your modifications as a new item in the GRUB
menus,
keeping what's already there, until you're sure that everything is
working fine.
Good idea. I'll do that. In any case the file is backed up, and I do
have slax handy!
Dotan Cohen
http://IE-Only.com
12:42 p.m.
Tim:
> Yes you can. Just go into the edit mode for the menu, make
changes as
> necessary to the options GRUB will use to boot with, and boot.
Dotan Cohen:
Er, how? I could not find any text editors in the options.
Press the e key. I though there were even prompts for that, but I'm not
going to reboot, now, to look at the GRUB screens.
The manuals, plus the GRUB website, should have all the gory details
about doing this sort of thing.
--
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
6:02 p.m.
Greetings Dotan ,
Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 2/16/06, Jeff Vian <jvian10(a)charter.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 22:07 +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
>
> It does not "remember" your previous selection. It does *always* boot
> the kernel marked as default unless you make some other selection from
> the menu.
>
Can I only boot from options in the menu? If I _know_ that I want to
boot from hdb8 or from (1,8)
Watch out here !! This is partially wrong counting . Yes indeed
hdb is the Primary Slave ( the Second IDE Hard Disk of the system )
But 8 is the seventh partition of hdb so in order to boot from
hdb8 you would have to ask grub to boot from (1,7 ) .
By all means you can do that while the computer boots , at the
boot menu press "e" make the change and go ahead .....
Kind Regards,
Kostas
6:36 p.m.
On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 02:02 +0200, Kostas Sfakiotakis wrote:
Greetings Dotan ,
Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On 2/16/06, Jeff Vian <jvian10(a)charter.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 22:07 +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
>>
>> It does not "remember" your previous selection. It does *always*
boot
>> the kernel marked as default unless you make some other selection from
>> the menu.
>>
>
> Can I only boot from options in the menu? If I _know_ that I want to
> boot from hdb8 or from (1,8)
Watch out here !! This is partially wrong counting . Yes indeed
hdb is the Primary Slave ( the Second IDE Hard Disk of the system )
But 8 is the seventh partition of hdb so in order to boot from
hdb8 you would have to ask grub to boot from (1,7 ) .
Confusion abounds with this.
hdb8 is indeed the 8th partition. Grub would access it at (hd1,7)
Remember, the partiton table starts counting with 1, Grub starts
counting with 0.
What grub uses is the _offset_ value from the first partition, while the
partition table uses the numerical value.
By all means you can do that while the computer boots , at the
boot menu press "e" make the change and go ahead .....
Kind Regards,
Kostas
12:18 a.m.
On 2/21/06, Kostas Sfakiotakis <kostassf(a)cha.forthnet.gr> wrote:
Greetings Dotan ,
Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On 2/16/06, Jeff Vian <jvian10(a)charter.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 22:07 +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
>>
>> It does not "remember" your previous selection. It does *always*
boot
>> the kernel marked as default unless you make some other selection from
>> the menu.
>>
>
> Can I only boot from options in the menu? If I _know_ that I want to
> boot from hdb8 or from (1,8)
Watch out here !! This is partially wrong counting . Yes indeed
hdb is the Primary Slave ( the Second IDE Hard Disk of the system )
But 8 is the seventh partition of hdb so in order to boot from
hdb8 you would have to ask grub to boot from (1,7 ) .
By all means you can do that while the computer boots , at the
boot menu press "e" make the change and go ahead .....
Kind Regards,
Kostas
Thanks you Kostas. You provided the most useful information here: what
the press and how to access the partition that I want. True, I did
figure it out in playing with the system in the last few days, but
your complete answer is appreciated nonetheless.
Dotan Cohen
http://technology-sleuth.com/question/how_can_i_be_safe_online.html
9:13 a.m.
On 2/16/06, Jeff Vian <jvian10(a)charter.net> wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 15:26 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> I am trying to fix the grub config file so that I can boot another OS
> on this machine. I need to play with the (1,3) part- but it is a pain
> to boot the system just to change this one file and then to power down
> again to test it. Is there not a simple text editor in Grub?
>
> Dotan Cohen
> http://technology-sleuth.com/long_answer/what_is_hdtv.html
>
> 2
>
Certainly you can do command line editing with grub during boot ( the
'e' key ).
However, those edits are only in memory and only during that boot. Grub
cannot write to a filesystem that is not even mounted yet.
To make changes permanent you need to actually edit the text file
grub.conf and save those changes when the system is running.
Also, How are you going to test your saved changes if you do not reboot
and let grub read and use the changed configuration?
In that case, how can I tell it to boot from hdb8, and if that doesn't
work to boot form hdb7, etc...
In grub-speak that's (1,8) , (1,7) , etc...
Dotan Cohen
http://technology-sleuth.com/long_answer/what_is_a_cellphone.html
6697
days inactive
6705
days old
36 comments
14 participants
participants (14)
-
akonstam＠trinity.edu -
Bob Taylor -
Dotan Cohen -
James Wilkinson -
Jeff Vian -
John Pierce -
John Summerfield -
Kostas Sfakiotakis -
Les Mikesell -
Mike McCarty -
Robert Nichols -
Tim -
Timothy Murphy -
Tony Dietrich