Michael Schwendt wrote:
On 20/10/2007, Karl Larsen <k5di@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I have put the new part of my overall grub writing on this list and
got complete quiet from the group.
Blame the endless number of new threads. You've just started a new
thread about GRUB instead of continueing in the old thread.
I ask you to read it again. The
definition of a root directory has been tested and it is right.
It's still very unfortunate to refer to a "root directory" when
dealing with GRUB. All that matters is what the GRUB root device is,
how it is defined via device.map and the BIOS disk numbering scheme,
and where it is mounted (!) when you access the files on it. As long
as it's mounted on the /boot mount-point, referring to a "root
directory" is misleading. You can even make the GRUB root device a
separate partition, but still store the kernel+initrd in a
sub-directory. That is because GRUB doesn't care where a file is
stored as long as it is told what the absolute path to the file is and
what device to enable.
Exactly. The 2 roots in a fedora grub.conf define partitions. That
which proceeds the kernel is the subdirectories it needs to look in in
the partition defined in the root.
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
