grub / grub2 conflicts
Richard W.M. Jones
rjones at redhat.com
Thu Sep 22 18:51:08 UTC 2011
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 11:45:11AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Sep 22, 2011, at 11:18 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
> > On 09/22/2011 02:02 PM, David Airlie wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 05:18:09PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 17:00 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >>>>> grub provides no mechanism for you to know that, which means you
> >>>>> can't
> >>>>> reliably know that. Which means relying on them being compatible
> >>>>> is
> >>>>> incorrect.
> >>>> You described yourself how libguestfs could check it. And failing
> >>>> libguestfs doing it, the user could be warned to check it.
> >>> I described something that is, practically speaking, impossible.
> >> you run rpm -q grub in the guest and on the host, if they are the same nvr,
> >> then they are the same package, where's the rocket science here.
> > The whole point of libguestfs's usage was that the package isn't actually
> > installed in the guest. So that won't work.
> > The rest of your point ignores that grub1 is going away as soon as is
> > reasonably practicable.
> It also ignores any non-rpm guests.
libguestfs can inspect any guest and work out what apps are installed,
what OS there is, what arch, what bootloader etc. We support a dozen
different Linux distros (not just rpm/deb-based but some really odd
ones too), along with FreeBSD, and Windows.
We really have thought about all of this.
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Fedora now supports 80 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)
More information about the devel