GNU bug report logs - #20071
grub-configuration needs a "force" flag

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: Tomáš Čech <sleep_walker <at> suse.cz>

Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 12:00:05 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Tomáš Čech <sleep_walker <at> suse.cz>
Subject: bug#20071: closed (Re: Bug Hunting: status?)
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 17:37:02 +0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Your bug report

#20071: grub-configuration needs a "force" flag

which was filed against the guix package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to 20071 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

-- 
20071: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20071
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems
[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]
From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: 20071-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Bug Hunting: status?
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 18:36:41 +0100
Dear,

On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 16:31, zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 14:37, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>
> > Do you still think that would make sense, Tomáš?
>
> The email address used by Tomáš returned  "address not found". And
> yesterday I asked to Sleep_Walker on IRC (assuming same nick = same
> person :-)) what is the new address to report.
>

If this wishlist bug still makes senses, please re-open it.


Thank you.

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]
From: Tomáš Čech <sleep_walker <at> suse.cz>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Cc: guix-devel <at> gnu.org, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: none
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 12:59:30 +0100
[Message part 4 (text/plain, inline)]
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 09:35:42AM +0100, Tomas Cech wrote:
>At Fri, 05 Dec 2014 00:04:23 +0100,
>Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>
>> Tomas Cech <sleep_walker <at> suse.cz> skribis:
>>
>> > I tried to install Guix as alternative OS to my Gentoo and openSUSE
>> > installations to give a try. I tried unsupported scenario -
>> > installation on LVM volume and separate /boot partition until I was
>> > told it is unsupported. Separate boot wasn't hard as I had to just
>> > copy generated files so they are loaded.
>>
>> OK, but there’s still an open bug on that topic.  :-)
>> http://bugs.gnu.org/19220
>
>Good, I'll give a try again.
>
>> > 1] if you set device to partition (and not to disk) in your grub-configuration like this:
>> >
>> >  (bootloader (grub-configuration
>> >                (device "/dev/sda4")))
>>
>> Why would you want to use a partition and not a disk?  I didn’t know
>> this was even possible.
>
>Because this way I can separate Grub managed by Guix and Grub from my
>Gentoo. As I'm playing with that on my notebook I need for work, this
>way can reduce risks.
>
>I'm not sure how Guix installer can manipulate with grub.cfg and I'd
>like to always have some working system...
>
>>
>> > `guix system init' will fail on grub installation. By default Grub
>> > tries to fit in the beginning of partition and fails if it can't fit
>> > in. I asked about this behaviour on Grub mailing list and it seems
>> > that there are two options:
>> >
>> >   a] add `--force' to command line and use block list for keeping information about position of Grub's core.img
>> >   b] use filesystem which allows embedding - BtrFS or ZFS
>> >
>> > I verified both options (a] and then b] with BtrFS) and it no longer fails.
>> >
>> > But,
>> > ad a] - I don't feel safe passing `--force' to grub-install every
>> > time. So if installation fails on this point and you'd like to use
>> > your FS anyway, you can pass `--no-grub' to `guix system init' and
>> > then rung grub-install manually.
>> >
>> > ad b] - I don't feel safe using still experimental BtrFS.
>>
>> OK.  I think the conclusion for Guix is to leave the defaults unchanged.
>> Perhaps we could add a ‘force?’ field to the ‘grub-configuration’ data
>> type to allow those who know what they doing to get the effect of
>> ‘--force’.  WDYT?

After giving some more thoughts and after more experience with the process I
do agree that exposing `--force' parameter into grub-configuration is good idea.

I'm filing bug for that.
[Message part 5 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

This bug report was last modified 5 years and 187 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.