Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So it seems nobody objected. What do we need to proceed?
Prepare a file with authors names to be used during the conversion and
a run to git-cvsimport using it? :-)
--
O T A V I OS A L V A D O R
---
I just tested this with and without the module, on a filesystem with and
without compression (all 4 combinations) and didn't observe any oddities.
If nobody objects I'll check this in.
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 11:56:36PM +0800, Bean wrote:
> Ok.
>
> 2007-12-12 Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 10:06:31AM +0800, Bean wrote:
> On second thoughts,the original patch is better, because lnxboot.img
> works with core.img, which depends on boot.img, kernel.img and
> grub-mkimage that exist only in i386-pc.
Ok, just checked that in.
--
Robert Millan
I know my rights;
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 15:37, Robert Millan wrote:
> No response? Does anybody object if I proceed?
No problem for me.
Okuji
___
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
Jordi Mallach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 03:37:28PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
>> No response? Does anybody object if I proceed?
>
> Did anyone comment on the trac-based solution I mentioned? If someone
> did, I missed it, sorry.
No, the reaction to from Okuji was tha
The creature has been seized:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?group=grub
I've left the bugs that apply to documentation since we'll probably reuse
much of GRUB Legacy's and they will still apply.
Finally the BTS is usable for keeping track of GRUB 2 stuff.
Two thoughts:
- The website still
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 05:51:17PM +0100, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 03:37:28PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > No response? Does anybody object if I proceed?
>
> Did anyone comment on the trac-based solution I mentioned? If someone
> did, I missed it, sorry.
My comment was:
So it seems nobody objected. What do we need to proceed?
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 12:45:48PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> This is a reaction to the "BTS overhaul" post, I just don't want to
> hijack the thread with a separate topic.
>
> If someone asked me what is the project that
