From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark H Weaver Subject: bug#31159: Reverse order for old grub.cfg entries Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 15:23:19 -0400 Message-ID: <87bmegiajc.fsf@netris.org> References: <87h8odb1fo.fsf@aikidev.net> <87y3hnnru3.fsf@netris.org> <87a7u2qmd4.fsf@gmail.com> <878t9llmr7.fsf@netris.org> <87604oy5j7.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48565) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f8shV-0001ur-MJ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 15:25:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f8shS-0005jI-Fx for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 15:25:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:51749) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f8shS-0005j8-BZ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 15:25:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f8shS-0001Lm-4l for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 15:25:02 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87604oy5j7.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:04:44 +0200") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: Vagrant Cascadian , 31159@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Ludovic, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > I agree with you. As long as the entry labels clearly show which one is > the most recent, that sounds good. > > However! On headless machines, we=E2=80=99d rather make sure users know = about > this change. On our Libreboot =E2=80=9Cbayfront=E2=80=9D server, GRUB fo= r some reason > fails to display anything, and on several occasions we=E2=80=99ve had to = blindly > select an older generation. Hopefully this is an unusual situation ;-), > but it could happen on ARM boards as well. Do you have an idea of how to make sure that users know about it? Mark