Call for testing: `grub-vanilla`

The current grub package is a heavily-patched version which enables "quiet boot" by default.

To provide an alternative I've packaged up grub-vanilla:

This has a minimal amount of patching over the upstream Arch package so may be more reliable for some people.

The package grub-vanilla-2.04-2 is currently in unstable.

The package is working fine for several people but I'd still recommend that before you install this on hardware you make sure you have a recovery medium prepared.

If you're unsure, I'd advise testing on a VM first to make sure it "works" before deploying it to hardware.

See here for "full clean install" instructions:

How did it go?

  • Working fine (VM)
  • Working fine (hardware)
  • Working but with issues (please post)
  • Major breakage (definitely post)

0 voters

Also, I'm not set on the package name. If there's a better one let me know (e.g. grub-classic etc.).

Package name

  • grub-vanilla
  • grub-classic
  • grub-noisy
  • grub-unquiet
  • grub-nopatch
  • grub-simple
  • grub-grub
  • Something else

0 voters


I went for it (on hardware) as I don't care for quiet boots. Simply works for me.

Was all of that heavy patching targeted at quiet booting or were there other reasons?

1 Like

As far as I know it's for quiet boots. I haven't looked in detail at the patch set, though it looks like there are some Fedora patches to enable other things like offline updates. However, that extra stuff definitely isn't supported (yet?) so they're a bit pointless (at the moment).

1 Like

Ah, thanks: no reason to switch back then.

Same as cleanjaro grub which I tested.
Works fine in both uefi and bios-legacy.
Only thing is that installation does not generate a grub.cfg, but a working grub.cfg.example.
A 'update-grub' will generate the required grub.cfg which is the same as grub.cfg.example.

For those wishing to have the original manjaro theme (instead of the black and white text grub menu), at /etc/default/grub


ps I ticked on the (VM) when it should be on (hardware). Sorry.


If you're replacing grub then you should already have a grub.cfg (or at least that was my thinking).

Hmm... my laptop still has the Manjaro theming. Is that because it's picking up the existing configuration?

You can change the vote. Click on "Hide results" and change the selection.

1 Like

In my testing, I removed/renamed grub.cfg so my testing can be complete.
It does not generate a new grub.cfg. But I understand the logic. Hope people are aware.

Done. Thanks.

1 Like

I can add an update-grub to the post_install() section. That way there's no potential issue.

Although - grub (whether Manjaro or Arch) also doesn't create a grub.cfg either.


I also removed/renamed /etc/grub.d and /etc/default/grub in my testing.
Might be good to recheck that new grub has correct grub.d and /default/grub (instead of pacnew or pacsave) to make it work as it should.

And for those who still want a hidden grub, this will do.


ps: I personally think GRUB_TIMEOUT_STYLE=countdown is better.
ps: I also think this grub for hidden menu is better, more efficient, than the existing grub.
Oh wait, I said this before. Never mind then.


I think vanilla suggests the highest upstream (pure GNU Grub).
Classic might fit better. Or grub-archlinux, if it's the same as Archlinux package.

Kudos for the effort!! :+1:

1 Like

I've added a poll for some possible names.

It reset the other poll... because Discourse... :weary:


This is now present in grub-vanilla-2.04-2 .

Re: Name
I choose something else - grub
Why? Simple, that's upstream grub, unadulterated grub. Not like Fedora grub, not grub-quiet, not manjaro grub (the one that modifies for intel-ucode). Nothing else. Zip. Nada.


Yeah, that's not up to me though. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

Yeah, I know. I know the feeling too.
Welcome to the club.

1 Like

Works fine on my test rig on a fresh 18.0.4 install. Grub-classic is the best name I feel. Vanilla to me implies pure stock. That’s also why I changed name from grub-clean, I felt it maybe mis-leading as there are a few small patches included.


Works fine in WM & on my "multibooted blind wall" hardware, I still use syslinux, so... :upside_down_face:
Imho, grub-vanilla's not so bad

Hello @jonathon,

i tested grub-vanilla on a VM.
After installing grub-vanilla i changed the theme to breeze-grub.

Everything worked fine. :ok_hand:

Works fine on my hardware, thanks for that goodie!

What are these small patches?
I've tested upstream grub on manjaro OS and works as well (the same actually) as yours or this vanilla-grub depending on what we put into /etc/default/grub.
As for intel-ucode and amd-ucode, the upstream grub 2.04 does add this to the initrd line and boots manjaro well with intel-ucode early.

The only difference is this "Welcome to Grub" line that appears momentarily before grub menu. Some find this offensive but I think that shouldn't be enough to thrash out the upstream grub. Anyway, looking at the git lines, I think there may be just a couple of lines to make this message disappear. I don't know, I'm not a coder but I think it shouldn't be too difficult for a novice coder, if it is that offensive.

And naturally os-prober needs to be modified if it needs to boot other distro's with intel-ucode separated out in /boot. Distros that have intel-ucode incorporated into the kernels may not have the incentive to modify their os-prober to accommodate for this.

So, appreciate if you can point out what these small patches are, other than the above.

After thinking about it, I'm not sure I like the name grub-classic. My package is not simply the same as the "classic" pre-quiet boot GRUB and is instead far more in line with upstream Arch. However, it does still carry a number of patches.

So it's more like "vanilla flake" or something... I need to give it more thought.


Forum kindly sponsored by Bytemark