Re: [PATCH 1/2] system: Rename grub to bootloader.

[David Craven <david@craven.ch>]

I agree on this patch. The renaming is not very good and breaks
things. It needs to be done in smaller steps. The one that renames the
flag could be done dough, since that doesn't break anything and
changes the cli interface. The sooner we can do that the better IMO,
because it is a user facing change.

I need to study for my exams the next week or two, but my current
thinking on the next steps to accomplish the goal of being bootloader
agnostic are:

1. discard <menu-entry> in gnu/system/grub in favor of
<boot-parameters> from gnu/system - small api changes

2. focus on the code in gnu/system/vm.scm and gnu/build/vm.scm. A lot
of decisions are being made about the qemu package, the qemu flags,
the file-system, the bootloader, the architecture and the kernel etc.
that should be moved elsewhere. - will affect guix/scripts/system and
probably the system tests infrastructure, the existing api should be
kept to avoid breakage in those parts.

Currently using a different bootloader affects far to many parts of
the codebase.

Do you think that (in general) adding new code to gnu/build is still a
valid design choice or do you consider it a better idea to turn most
of the code from gnu/build incrementally into gexps in gnu/system?