| Author |
Message |
pupiddo
|
|
|
Post subject:
 Posted: 24.03.2012, 19:46
|
|
Joined: 2012-03-21
Posts: 5
Status: Offline
|
|
|
Luis_P wrote:
My question is simple: is grub 1.99-18 secure now?
Luis_P
I think no.
The package is the same but the workaround it's ok for me.So I put "solved".
Did I made a mistake?  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
piper
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 29.03.2012, 18:38
|
|
Moderator
Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 467
Location: cheektowaga, ny
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Luis_P
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 29.03.2012, 22:38
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 142
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Status: Offline
|
|
|
piper wrote:
Bugs in package grub-pc (versions 1.99-18 [amd64, i386, kfreebsd-amd64], 1.99-17 [kfreebsd-i386]) in unstable
Then, what is the advice of the team? These bugs seem very old (one and half year) and, until now, grub worked apparently fine. Must or must not put grub-pc on hold?
Regards.
Luis_P |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
piper
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 31.03.2012, 17:58
|
|
Moderator
Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 467
Location: cheektowaga, ny
Status: Offline
|
|
I am not a member of the team and I have no problems with grub. Grub is installed in MBR and I have no reason with all my distro's installed to use grub on partition (2320.5GB).
IMHO I don't think grub on hold is wise, again, just my opinion and not the teams. I have no idea what theier opinion is. |
_________________
debian sid | apt-get into it
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Lat
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 31.03.2012, 19:03
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-19
Posts: 145
Status: Offline
|
|
This thread shouldn't be marked as [Solved] because it isn't. The suggested solution is a workaround which is to install Grub in MBR, that's not what I want. I still have Grub 1 in MBR and then I chainload to GRUB2 to my aptosid partition/install.
Is this a new standard that Grub2 can't be installed in a partition? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Lat
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 31.03.2012, 21:55
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-19
Posts: 145
Status: Offline
|
|
So okay. Grub2 shouldn't be installed in a partition
Code:
/usr/sbin/grub-setup: warn: Attempting to install GRUB to a partitionless disk
or to a partition. This is a BAD idea..
/usr/sbin/grub-setup: warn: Embedding is not possible. GRUB can only be
installed in this setup by using blocklists. However, blocklists are
UNRELIABLE and their use is discouraged..
Then what do I need to do to dist-upgrade and not touch the current MBR? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
DeepDayze
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: 01.04.2012, 15:24
|
|
Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 609
Location: USA
Status: Offline
|
|
|
Lat wrote:
So okay. Grub2 shouldn't be installed in a partition
Code:
/usr/sbin/grub-setup: warn: Attempting to install GRUB to a partitionless disk
or to a partition. This is a BAD idea..
/usr/sbin/grub-setup: warn: Embedding is not possible. GRUB can only be
installed in this setup by using blocklists. However, blocklists are
UNRELIABLE and their use is discouraged..
Then what do I need to do to dist-upgrade and not touch the current MBR?
I remember Grub Legacy worked fine installed to a partition rather than the MBR...so this to me sounds like a new "feature" in Grub2. Perhaps there's a bug report on this? Maybe the Grub 2 devs may need more info in order to resolve that one |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
