On 22 February 2012 06:57, Nikos Chantziaras <rea...@arcor.de> wrote: > [...] Given that Grub 1 is > both beta software (it got stuck at 0.97, never made it to 1.0) and > unmaintained,
Just looking at KDE 4.0 and GNOME 3.0 should tell you that version numbers can be *very* deceiving. And while grub-0.97 may "officially" be beta software it is much more stable than a lot of software that does sport the 1.0 designation. I think we should keep this version of grub around, at least for a while longer, since a lot of our users are used to this essential piece of software and may be hesitant to migrate to grub2 or other boot loaders. > stabilizing Grub 2 ASAP is the sanest thing you can do, since > even though it's also beta software, it's at least maintained by upstream. I would hesitate to say it's the *sanest* thing to do, but we should at least get it into ~arch and make sure our documentation is up to date. Cheers, Ben
