Re: grub very strange problems

Kam Leo wrote:

On 6/23/05, Thomas Taylor <linxt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thursday 23 June 2005 09:10, Alexander Dalloz wrote:

Am Do, den 23.06.2005 schrieb Felipe Contreras um 17:29:

On 6/21/05, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The problem I'm having right now is that grub starts in the shell, as
if no grub.conf existed... but there it is... and it seems to be ok.

I'm going to answer myself here. Since no one in #fedora nor
fedora-list answered or cared to suggest anything; I tried
#lfs-support, and thanks to jbit I found what the problem was.

For some reason grub is not following symlinks on ReiserFS, I don't
know if it's a problem specific with the grub compiled in Fedora but
making /etc/grub.conf a normal file it worked fine.

Felipe Contreras

I wonder a bit as I always thought /etc/grub.conf exists only for
convenience - better to be recognized as conf(iguration) file for grub.
And that the real configuration used by grub is only
/boot/grub/menu.lst, to which /etc/grub.conf on Fedora by default is a
symlink.

Alexander

Hi Alexander:

When I do 'ls -ap /boot/grub' it indicates that @menu.lst is the symlink and
grub.conf the original.  Am I misinterpreting this?

Tom

--
Tom Taylor
Linux user #263467
Federal Way, WA
Iraq war: 1,728 and counting

On my system /boot/grub/menu.list is a symbolic link to /boot/grub/grub/conf and /etc/grub.conf is symbolically linked to /boot/grub/grub.conf . Did the OP at some point delete the original
grub.conf in /boot/grub?

Coincidently, I was at grub homepage reading up on GRUB2 and some other things and I noted that /boot/grub/menu.lst is supposed to be the config file. And I am sure that is the way it was in the RedHat days, though I haven't really looked closely in some time. It is obviously trivial to the workings of Fedora though.

Scott