I always have two kernel files on the /boot partition: vmlinuz and vmlinuz-old grub2-mkconfig have not detected the first one at all, and instead set vmlinuz-old as default. I was also unable to edit the 'linux' argument directly in grub - I had to boot using vmlinuz-old and change it by hand in config file. While not critical, it may be annoying for less experienced users coming from grub-legacy.
The version comparison function in GRUB2, version_test_gt() (in /usr/share/grub/grub-mkconfig_lib) don't recognize your vmlinux-old-* format for representing old kernels, so GRUB2 incorrectly determined that your vmlinux-old-* images has the latest kernel version, thus making it default. When 'make install' in a kernel source tree discovers you already have a kernel image with the same name, the older kernel image will be renamed to 'vmlinux-X.X.X.old', instead of 'vmlinux-old-X.X.X', and it's the only way to represent "this is an old kernel" that GRUB2 recognizes. Please name your old kernels as 'vmlinux-X.X.X.old', and GRUB2 will handle it correctly. "Unable to edit the 'linux' argument directly in grub"? Please describe what exactly happened. Seems there's indeed something with the line editing in grub-2.0_beta2. Also, I guess the question should be asked on the forum, not Bugzilla. There are so many "INVALID" bugs popping all around...
Yes, I know the general naming scheme, but thought that the vmlinuz and vmlinuz-old scheme is a bit popular and worth attention. I think I can add this information to the wiki - seems fair enough? As for editing the 'linux' argument directly in grub: - I set the cursor on the desired line - I press 'e' to enter edit mode - I move down to the relevant line - in my case it is 'linux vmlinuz-old root=/dev/sda5 ro' - I set the cursor on the '-' between 'vmlinuz' and 'old' - I press DEL - 7 (!) chars are deleted - I recreate the missing part of the line, which now looks like: 'linux vmlinuz root=/dev/sda5 ro' - I press F10 (or Ctrl-X, result is the same) to boot - booted kernel is still vmlinuz-old (!) As to reporting bug - I would normally tried searching for help on IRC, but I noticed this post which encourages users to put every noticed GRUB2 bug on bugzilla: http://floppym.blogspot.com/2012/03/call-out-for-grub2-testing.html Probably I would not even install GRUB2 without this, because grub-legacy works fine for me ;)
(In reply to comment #2) > Yes, I know the general naming scheme, but thought that the vmlinuz and > vmlinuz-old scheme is a bit popular and worth attention. > I think I can add this information to the wiki - seems fair enough? You may add it to the wiki. Unfortunately I don't know anybody using the vmlinux-old naming scheme, though. > As for editing the 'linux' argument directly in grub: > - I set the cursor on the desired line > - I press 'e' to enter edit mode > - I move down to the relevant line - in my case it is 'linux vmlinuz-old > root=/dev/sda5 ro' > - I set the cursor on the '-' between 'vmlinuz' and 'old' > - I press DEL > - 7 (!) chars are deleted > - I recreate the missing part of the line, which now looks like: 'linux > vmlinuz root=/dev/sda5 ro' > - I press F10 (or Ctrl-X, result is the same) to boot > - booted kernel is still vmlinuz-old (!) Exactly what I met. Additionally the border of the edit menu screen on the right side looks broken for me. I did not notice any similar bug reports upstream, and I chose to bear it because I thought the developers would notice it before me... Well, anyway, I will test grub-9999 now, if it fails there I may try reporting upstream. > As to reporting bug - I would normally tried searching for help on IRC, but > I noticed this post which encourages users to put every noticed GRUB2 bug on > bugzilla: > http://floppym.blogspot.com/2012/03/call-out-for-grub2-testing.html > Probably I would not even install GRUB2 without this, because grub-legacy > works fine for me ;) I suppose the first problem related to the naming scheme should go either on the forums or upstream. Would Gentoo add a patch to add such a minor feature before upstream accept the patch? Quite unlikely. The second line editing issue, I guess it for upstream, too... I don't see grub-2.00_beta2-r1.ebuild applying any distro-specific patches.
The line editing issue exists on grub-9999, too, on my system. GRUB_PLATFORMS='pc', ~amd64, gcc-4.6.2, CFLAGS="-march=native -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -floop-interchange -floop-strip-mine -floop-block".
The kernel naming requirements could be documented; the wiki is a good place for that. Please report the line editing problem upstream. http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/grub-bugs.html Thank you for testing!
Probably better to leave this open until upstream acknowledges it.
Reported upstream: https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/index.php?35986
