dracut/grubby fails to update grub.cfg

[Stefan Huchler]

Chris Murphy <lists at colorremedies.com> writes:
> There should be packages somewhere on http://czarc.org but I'm not
> sure where. If you can't find them lemme know and I'll go dig around.

thank you is that the file?
http://czarc.org/fedora/repo/20/x86_64/grubby-8.35-4%2b.gc759.fc20.x86_64.rpm


> /boot on Btrfs isn't a priority for Fedora. In fact, /boot on LVM
> isn't either. And even things like rootfs on LVM integrated raid
> (rather than on md raid) isn't even possible in the installer. Since
> /boot on ext3/4 and XFS are working reliably, there just isn't a
> perceived strong need to get /boot on Btrfs working better.

I think making one btrfs directly on the disk is a good idea, because I
dont hhave to deal with aligning and such stuff btrfs takes care of that.


> The bug is in grubby, which is what's called from within kernel
> packages to update bootloader configuration scripts: GRUB legacy,
> GRUB2, syslinux, yaboot, and probably a bunch of other bootloaders are
> all supported by grubby. It looks at the existing "old" kernel entry
> to use as a guide for inserting a new entry for the new kernel. It
> fails because it doesn't understand subvolumes.

ok interesting, thx for clearification.

> There is no grub-update or update-grub on Fedora or upstream. All it
> does is call 'grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg' (on BIOS
> systems, it's different on UEFI systems).

yes u are right, in the hurry I mixed up old wisdom with my new distro
:)
And btw UEFI sucks :)



> The simplest solution for you is to create an ext4 volume, and copy
> the contents of /boot there, and update fstab accordingly. Then grubby
> will succeed updating grub.cfg.

I know you can create subvolumes under btrfs fs, but can u create ext4
subvolumes under btrfs? I doubt that, I think u thought I had lvm or
something between the harddisk and my btrfs volume, I dont have that,
its just btrfs on sda nothing else :)


> Well, one could argue that multiple bootloader projects is really
> stupid, that there should be some way for all distributions to agree
> on how to boot a Linux system, and then have one bootloader that can
> make this happen. But the fact is people disagree on such fundamental
> things, and they go work on their own bootloaders. And even within
> GRUB2 the distros don't agree, and they hack GRUB2 and make it rather
> distinctly different so GRUB2 on Fedora isn't even the same thing as
> on Ubuntu.

Ok I get taht u need some specialist bootloaders like ISOLINUX for lol
ISOs :) I was pretty happy that mkconfig thing in fedora did handle my
setup so well. Just stupid when fedora can handle it so good but a wire
between the installer and this tool hinders it to work its silly :)


> So then Bootloaderspec came along to try to fix this, and still
> Fedora's implementation deviates from the official one, which is
> itself just a draft I think. And there's also a fork of the draft. I'm
> willing to bet there are over 500 ways to boot a Linux system among
> various bootloaders and filesystem layouts. Whereas Windows and OS X
> have maybe 10 ways each, 8 of which are so obscure they almost never
> come up. So the FOSS world fractures its limited resources into a
> bunch of projects, making the most mature project still incredibly
> user hostile by requiring some of the most esoteric knowledge
> imaginable. It's a farm versus a microwavable dinner.

yes thats why virtualisation like kvm (full) is so hipp, because its a
pain in the ass to install 2 linuxes on one box, its easier to install
linux on a pc with windows then on one with linux on it :)