On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Colin Watson <cjwat...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 04:09:51PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 08:38:10AM +1000, Bron Gondwana wrote: >> > On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:21:46PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: >> > > I'm sorry but GRUB Legacy is not maintained. At least not by us; we've >> > > deprecated it in favour of GRUB 2. >> > > >> > > It is also being abandoned by distributors, so I wouldn't recommend that >> > > you >> > > put any effort in developing for it. >> > >> > You've been spouting this line for years, and yet my Ubuntu 10.4 machine >> > uses, guess what, GRUB 1. > > I assume you typoed, since there's no such thing as Ubuntu 10.4 yet. > When there is (well, 10.04 anyway), it will use GRUB 2 by default. > >> > Edward - please do continue to develop patches for GRUB 1 (the one that >> > still actually works plenty well enough for lots of people) and ignore the >> > naysayers who are happy to throw out backwards compatibility. > > It would be great if somebody could take up Edward's work and port it to > GRUB 2. If nobody else does then I'd be interested in doing so myself, > although I will not be able to start for a month or two from now. Is there any guild lines for porting GPLv2 code to GRUB2? I've looked at the GRUB2 wiki but very few things are documented there (http://grub.enbug.org/). I'd like to see what it would take to port the patches. If I can afford it, I'd like to try. > > > Robert is working hard on making GRUB 2 usable, and is just advising > Edward that, right now, there is no upstream for GRUB Legacy who could > either accept or usefully comment on his patch. It would of course be > possible for some people (presumably mostly the distributors who rely on > it) to get together and declare themselves the new upstream for GRUB > Legacy, but most of the people who might be interested in such things > seem to have either lost interest or thrown their weight behind GRUB 2 > upstream. Certainly this distributor right here is in the latter camp as > it seems much more likely to produce a result that meets our needs in > the end. (Plus, I think such a revitalised upstream would be a caretaker > at best, and wouldn't really be able to effectively work on some of the > major issues that have dogged distributors of GRUB Legacy for years > without reinventing the wheel of GRUB 2.) > > This isn't naysaying those people who post patches for GRUB Legacy - but > given the reality that nobody is maintaining GRUB Legacy upstream right > now, which is better, to have your patch ignored or to receive a note > saying that it's against an unmaintained target? I'd go for not being > ignored any day. > > -- > Colin Watson [cjwat...@ubuntu.com] > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
-- Cheers, Peng Tao State Key Laboratory of Networking and Switching Technology Beijing Univ. of Posts and Telecoms. _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
