Sorry if I pissed you off earlier...
I agree that it was my lack of sight <at 2:30AM of course> that probed me
to call it a bug. I agree now that it is indeed not a bug but perhaps an
oversight of docs. I apparently am correct if this is a pattern on this
list. Is there a faq I should have read? I am sorry if I missed it.
Dave
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Khimenko Victor wrote:
> 26-Jul-00 11:03 you wrote:
>
> > Excuse me but I did in fact read the documentation. Iwasn't being serious
> > bout the microsoft comment. Please calm down. With an attitude like that
> > no one will use grub. (I am the only person I know who does).
>
> > I think its great but you need to realize that most grub users are ex-lilo
> > people.
>
> Correct. That's why we see questions about this "bug" every week or so.
>
> > I have read your documentation and did not see any special provisions for
> > people who have boot partitions.
>
> It's simple: GRUB does not have such concept. GRUB does not care if you
> have boot partition or not. So it should not do any such "special provisions".
> If you want put your menu.lst not in (hd1,0)/boot/grub/menu.lst but in
> in (hd1,0)/grub/menu.lst you CAN do so (with modification of install command
> or with ln -s . boot in your /boot :-)
>
> > Sorry if your almight program had a bug. Try not to be so touchy in the
> > future. I was merely trying to help and was told to make a bug report by
> > somone on kernelnewbies on irc.openprojects.net.
>
> Bug reports for new bugs is good thing. Still usually it's wise idea to
> scan mailing list before. Question about this "bug" was answered last time
> two days ago.
>
>
>
>
>
