ludo@HIDDEN (Ludovic Courtès)to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Mar 2015 11:59:48 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Tue Mar 10 07:59:48 2015 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41288 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1YVIp9-0001q2-PK for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 07:59:48 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([184.108.40.206]:57075) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <tcech@HIDDEN>) id 1YVIp7-0001pl-Tt for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 07:59:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <tcech@HIDDEN>) id 1YVIp1-0007CB-EI for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 07:59:40 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:38507) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <tcech@HIDDEN>) id 1YVIp1-0007C7-CF for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 07:59:39 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58773) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <tcech@HIDDEN>) id 1YVIoy-0006ac-UL for bug-guix@HIDDEN; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 07:59:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <tcech@HIDDEN>) id 1YVIot-0007Ax-SZ for bug-guix@HIDDEN; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 07:59:36 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([220.127.116.11]:59374 helo=mx2.suse.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <tcech@HIDDEN>) id 1YVIot-0007As-Lc; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 07:59:31 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay1.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [18.104.22.168]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AF39AC6E; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:59:31 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 12:59:30 +0100 From: =?utf-8?B?VG9tw6HFoSDEjGVjaA==?= <sleep_walker@HIDDEN> To: bug-guix@HIDDEN Subject: Re: none Message-ID: <20150310115930.GG16813@HIDDEN> References: <87a9347gtj.wl%sleep_walker@HIDDEN> <87wq67qao8.fsf@HIDDEN> <874mta7au9.wl%sleep_walker@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vv4Sf/kQfcwinyKX" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <874mta7au9.wl%sleep_walker@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2011-07-01) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x (no timestamps) [generic] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: guix-devel@HIDDEN, Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= <ludo@HIDDEN> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) --vv4Sf/kQfcwinyKX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 09:35:42AM +0100, Tomas Cech wrote: >At Fri, 05 Dec 2014 00:04:23 +0100, >Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> >> Tomas Cech <sleep_walker@HIDDEN> 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=E2=80=99s 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-confi= guration like this: >> > >> > (bootloader (grub-configuration >> > (device "/dev/sda4"))) >> >> Why would you want to use a partition and not a disk? I didn=E2=80=99t = 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 info= rmation 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 f= ails. >> > >> > 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 =E2=80=98force?=E2=80=99 field to the =E2=80=98gr= ub-configuration=E2=80=99 data >> type to allow those who know what they doing to get the effect of >> =E2=80=98--force=E2=80=99. 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. --vv4Sf/kQfcwinyKX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlT+3KEACgkQ37XrCapiVCMWpACfSVJbg63+THwkhNKavc6APZrt kWEAmgNur5/CPQHZFDO6An1ktHBk3Cd0 =Fo3z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vv4Sf/kQfcwinyKX--
Tomáš Čech <sleep_walker@HIDDEN>:
bug-guix@HIDDEN. Full text available.
guix. Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.