Op 29 jul. 2011 21:39 schreef "KESHAV P.R." <[email protected]> het volgende: > > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 00:58, Heiko Baums <[email protected]> wrote: > > Am Sat, 30 Jul 2011 00:47:03 +0530 > > schrieb "KESHAV P.R." <[email protected]>: > > > >> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 00:36, KESHAV P.R. <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > Please delete grub-gfx > >> > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=2416 . Although it has > >> > more votes, I modified the PKGBUILD a bit and replaced the package > >> > with grub-legacy-gfx > >> > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=50986 which builds fine > >> > in x86_64 system with gcc-multilib. Thanks in advance. > >> > > >> > Regards. > >> > > >> > Keshav > >> > > >> > >> Bump. anyone? > > > > I would keep grub-gfx and remove grub-legacy-gfx. The package in [core] > > is also called grub and not grub-legacy. And the source package is also > > called grub-0.97.tar.gz and not grub-legacy-0.97.tar.gz. So grub-gfx is > > the better name. > > > > Heiko > > > > I mentioned "current" upstream naming. According to upstream, > presently grub2 aka grub 1.9x == grub and grub 0.97 == grub-legacy . I > have also submittted a grub-legacy PKGBUILD to Allan for inclusion in > official repo (grub itself may be removed from core repo, who knows). > The source tarball name won't change upstream as it was generated > years back, shortly before grub became grub-legacy. > > //offnote: I simply bumped this thread since its strange that no one > replied to this mail for 4 days. > > Regards. > > Keshav
fyi, I have no plans to remove or rename grub from core anytime soon and I doubt Allan will rename it without letting me know. Grub2 is unstable. Sure so is grub1 officially but at least they don't break it with every release. Ronald
