Bug#451701: grub: boot sector code is not automatically updated, resulting in boot trouble with 2.6.23

[Robert Millan]

severity 451701 important
thanks

Hi Marc,

We intend to replace GRUB Legacy with GRUB 2 for lenny.  Assuming the
time schedule permits us to do so (and currently I think it will), this
will collateraly become a non-issue because of default upgrade to GRUB 2
(not to boot sector, but chained in menu.lst).

So if you don't mind, I'd like to put this on hold untill it's clear which
path we'll take.  In case we ultimately are unable to do the transition in
time for lenny, we could document this in the release notes or something.

Btw, GRUB 2 Linux loader is mostly based on (surprise!) GRUB Legacy's.  It
should work fine with recent Linux versions, but if you can test and verify
that, it'd be appreciated.

Rising severity just to make sure this isn't forgotten.

Thanks

On Sat, Nov 17, 2007 at 09:35:28PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> Package: grub
> Version: 0.97-29
> Severity: normal
> 
> Hi,
> 
> this bug is mostly meant as reference for other people who fall into
> this pit, please do not close even if you do not intend to fix it.
> 
> Recently, with 2.6.23.something, the Linux kernel binary format has
> been changed in a way that older (I am not sure whether sarge's grub
> is affected) grub code cannot boot it: Boot terminates with "No setup
> signature found" or "Setup signature not found".
> 
> Since the grub package does not have maintainer scripts that update
> the boot sector automatically, and no documentation suggests running
> grub-install after updating the package, this will kill reboot of all
> systems that were installed long ago (I suspect pre-sarge), and will
> now be updated to 2.6.23.something (verified with .8).
> 
> While the fix, a new grub-install, is trivial, people need to be aware
> of this issue.
> 
> On the technical side, I'd like to suggest that the grub package
> verifies on postinst that the boot sector holds _current_ grub code
> and displays a big fat warning, reminding the user to execute
> grub-install manually, or offering to do this for the user during
> postinst automatically, to avoid incompatibilities like this in the
> future.
> 
> At least, this needs to be prominently documented in NEWS.Debian or
> README.Debian. This issue has caused me a nightmare service window
> today since all my test systems were young enough to have 2.6.23.x
> compatible grub boot sector code. The first two productive systems
> were older than that.
> 
> Greetings
> Marc
> 
> -- System Information:
> Debian Release: lenny/sid
>   APT prefers unstable
>   APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
> Architecture: i386 (i686)
> 
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.23.1-scyw00225 (PREEMPT)
> Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
> Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
> 
> Versions of packages grub depends on:
> ii  libc6                     2.6.1-6        GNU C Library: Shared libraries
> ii  libncurses5               5.6+20071013-1 Shared libraries for terminal hand
> 
> grub recommends no packages.
> 
> -- no debconf information
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pkg-grub-devel mailing list
> Pkg-grub-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grub-devel
> 

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)