Linux MintThis forum is for the discussion of Linux Mint.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
New install of 17.1 Cinnamon. Other distro is Slack 14. GRUB2 installed by choice into the root device of Mint. MBR contains Old Grub. There are 2 ways I can boot into Mint:
1. Point the old grub on MBR to /boot/vmlinuz-3.13.0-37-generic and initrd.img-3.13.0-37-generic in the Mint root partition. Works fine.
2. Point the old grub to /boot/grub/i386-pc/core.img in the Mint root partition. Also works, though it takes a few secs longer.
Question: Is there any functional difference between these two boot methods? I don't see any obviously different behavior, but I still wonder.
Your installation of Mint 17.1 seems not successful.
I think you mis-read his post. He said both options do boot.
Quote:
Is there any functional difference between these two boot methods?
No. Have the same thing with Grub Legacy booting Ubuntu. The first option directly boots, the second option is more like a chainload entry and when I select it, I get the Ubuntu boot menu with various options.
But it makes no sense to me installing two bootloaders in two places.
Makes perfect since IMO. I have a similar setup and allows for a distro to update it's own grub menu during updates without having to go and update grub in the distro with the bootloader in the mbr, which I tend to forget to do from time to time.
Last edited by colorpurple21859; 09-05-2015 at 07:51 AM.
If you have multiple operating systems as is the case here, installing a bootloader to the root partition of the second system allows you to chainload it. The OP has two entries to boot Mint in his Grub Legacy. There is no need to do it, probably just to test. The first method will boot a few seconds faster as it doesn't go to the menu of the second OS as the second option does.
Just to be clear, this isn't a UEFI box. The two boot loaders are an "accident of history." Original distro (Slack 14) installed legacy grub in MBR. Some time later I installed Mint 17.1 in unused space on the same physical drive. During the Mint install I selected the Mint root partition for grub2, because I didn't want to screw up my working MBR. Simple as that.
I'm marking this thread as SOLVED, because I believe my original question has been answered.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.