Some users, myself included, become confused between install-grub and grub-install. Wondering if we can change it to something more appropriate like grub-install-script or grub-install-auto rather than switching up the order of words?
1 Like
+1 good idea 
2 Likes
pacman and pamac
sometimes ^^
essentially the same issue
Just pay attention and know what you are doing - and which tools you are using to what end
is my opinion. 
2 Likes
The names you suggest don’t help me either. I would just read the description in pamac to make sure I was installing the correct one.
I recall trying to sway opinion on this once before, but it was largely ignored.
The original poll from @philm indicates that voters overwhelmingly preferred grub-reinstall rather than install-grub; I would have preferred it was called manjaro-grub-installer (or similar) to help differentiate it as a Manjaro-specific addition.
At the time, the naming wasn’t anywhere near as important as making sure the script did what was advertised. An unfortunate annoyance for some (with older UEFI implementations) was that the boot order might sometimes be lost in the process; needing to be manually reset in BIOS.
3 Likes
This is the best idea in my opinion. A bit like manjaro-pipewire makes things obvious.
1 Like
Well another example of majority opinion simply being wrong then.
The script isnt a reinstaller.
Sure thats what most people will be using it for mostly.
It really is grub-install just automagikfied.
Its raison d’etre is to do what grub-install does just without the extra burly syntax that users have trouble with.
It installs grub. Thats what it does. And it mimmicks the function of grub-install exactly, just easier to execute. In fact what it does is call grub-install to do all the actual work.
Most people will only use it to ‘update’ their existing grub install, as so many erroneously believe update-grub accomplishes, and that would be a _re_install … but again, thats not the only function of the tool.
( any complaints about that existing nomenclature should be forwarded up the linux chain )
I dont necessarilly hate the idea of differentiating it some other way … but using some incorrect name just for the sake of difference would be a bit silly, in my humble opinion.
2 Likes
Indeed.
And in the heat of the moment some of us created other polls [1] [2] in an attempt to detract from the original binary vision (install-grub vs. grub-reinstall).
In retrospect, HansGrubber should have been a fair contender.
With the benefit of hindsight manjaro-grub-installer does seem the most obvious candidate if the tool is to be officially renamed.
In fact, it does even more than that. Several safety checks were also added to this mechanism that didn’t exist before; at least, not in the tools previously adopted by Manjaro.
For example, a check for other loaders in the UEFI fallback location:
efi_source_file="$efi_directory/EFI/$bootloader_id/$efi_grub_file"
efi_target_file="$(find $path -name $efi_boot_file)"
if [[ -e "$efi_source_file" ]] && [[ -e "$efi_target_file" ]]; then
cmp -s "$efi_source_file" "$efi_target_file" && fallback_is_same=true
fi
which overwrites a file only if conditions are right:
if [[ "$grub_type" == "EFI" ]] && [[ -e "$efi_source_file" ]] && [[ -e "$efi_target_file" ]] \
&& [[ "$fallback_is_same" == "true" ]] && [[ "$failed_update" == "false" ]]; then
echo "Update UEFI Fallback file: $efi_source_file"
cp "$efi_source_file" "$efi_target_file"
fi
The ‘John McClane’ of Grub Installers.
2 Likes
Discussion about the name is probably too late considering install-grub was included with Manjaro 24.0.5 ISOs released 2024-07-30
[shared] add install-grub (94a43e26) ·Profiles & Settings / iso-profiles · gitlab.manjaro.org
There’s kernel-install, which is part of systemd-boot. Does that confuse you?
If you don’t like a executable file name, you can simply create an alias in your shell profile or a symbolic link in /usr/local/bin/.
1 Like
Agreed.
Prefixing (whatever a script/tool might be called) with manjaro- has been done previously with other tools such as manjaro-chroot, for example.
It’s probably a valid convention to adopt each time Manjaro offers a tool that simplifies a process for newer users; and that’s what it’s really about, isn’t it.
It could nonetheless still be changed, before it’s widely adopted; though, I concede the optimum time to solidify the name has already passed.
Naming was largely left in limbo after the original discussion thread, and the name initially coined by @philm was used by defacto. This may have been the intention ( ), especially after so many voted for grub-reinstall. As @cscs said:
Come now, it was a valid observation on the part of the OP, and a fair suggestion. As @nikgnomic suggests, it’s likely just a bit late (the work has already been done to include it in the ISO).