On Mon, Oct 3, 2016, at 16:59 CDT, William Hubbs <willi...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> All, > > I want to look into removing grub:0 from the tree; here are my thoughts > on why it should go. > > - the handbook doesn't document grub:0; we officially only support > grub:2. > > - Removing grub:0 from the tree doesn't stop you from using it. If people > really want it I will place it in the graveyard overlay. > > - grub:0 is dead upstream. They have not done any work on it in years. +1 Yes, let's lastrite it and put it into ::graveyard as well. People that insist on using it can find it there then. > - The only real problem with grub:2 has to do with pperception. Yes, > their documentation has a strong preference toward using their > configuration script (grub-mkconfig) to generate your grub.cfg, but > this is not required. On modern systems with UEFI and efi payloads we have the following alternatives as well: sys-boot/refind sys-boot/systemd-boot (aka gummiboot) (alternatively sys-apps/systemd) - direct efi stub loading I don't see any compelling argument that grub:0 would be the only alternative if one tries to avoid grub:2. Best, Matthias
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
