[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: PPC executable name

From: Nico -telmich- Schottelius
Subject: Re: PPC executable name
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 10:49:00 +0200
User-agent: echo $message | gpg -e $sender -s | netcat mailhost 25

Marco Gerards [Tue, May 10, 2005 at 08:03:57PM +0200]:
> Hollis Blanchard <address@hidden> writes:
> > I'd like to rename the PPC executable from "grubof" to "grub". If
> > nothing else, it will avoid the question "is it grubof.cfg or
> > grub.cfg?". Thoughts?
> What I would prefer is _grub or so.  To make clear it is not usable
> just like this.  We don't want people loading this file directly.
> Adding a "_" might make it clear this is a file that is weird in a way
> and users should not use it directly.  The name `grubof' is not *that*
> bad either.  People do not use it directly, right?
> For any arch the config file should be called grub.cfg, IMO.

Oh, I misunderstood hollis, if that's true. I thought grubof will later
be the 'call it with a configuration, wait some seconds, and grub is

Btw, what will the way you advise,
   a) like yaboot, mount the bootstrap partiton only when writing config
   b) or mount it as /boot, modifiy grub.cfg on it?

I would like the later option, because as far as I understood, making
changes to grub.cfg does not need any command execution, as grub
(the binary, which can be loaded by of) didn't change.

Or is this assumption wrong?


Keep it simple & stupid, use what's available.
Please use pgp encryption: 8D0E 27A4 is my id. |

Attachment: pgpjxyh2ZZt_Y.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]