grub2 vs grub name
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 196
- Forks
- 55
- Avg merge
- 3d 2h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 14
Description
Hello, thank you for your project. I attempted to create a bootc-compatible image not based on Fedora and encountered several issues. The most significant challenge was the hardcoded references to grub2 in the code. The problem is that not all Linux-based systems adhere to the grub/grub2 naming convention. For instance, in the system I was working with, there is no grub2 package—what exists is simply grub, which is already version 2.*.
As a result, I had to manually replace all references to grub2 with grub in the code.
Would it be possible to make the dependency on grub2 optional? For example, this could be configured through a settings file or provided as a runtime option.
Thank you for considering this suggestion.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by locating the hardcoded grub2 references in bootupd and trace how the dependency is selected for image creation. Compare the current behavior with systems that provide grub instead, then define a configurable way to select the package name; done means such images can be created without manually editing the code.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- linux, rust
- Domain
- operating-systems
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100