On Tuesday 14 October 2003 7:12 pm, Robert Millan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 05:48:23PM +0200, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: > > Well, now the patch is adapted to a later version. It's a good thing. But > > I don't think the patch has been cleaned up. As his patch changes core > > parts of GRUB and too unreadable, I can't accept, regardless of how many > > people use it. > > > > I would be happy, if you or someone else could clean up the patch. It is > > not easy, because the patch changes many things. > > I think it's sad that for whatever reason Thierry has been alienated from > GRUB development. > > I'm all for getting this patch integrated, but don't think I'm the most > indicate for that as I'm unfamiliar with stage1 internals and it'd take me > a lot of time to figure out what the i386 assembler code in stage1 is > doing.
I am sorry, I did not know that there was so much "politics" involved. I have read stage1.S, both in its original form, and the new version, and find the new version well documented. But it is some years since I did assembler coding. I am not a grub developer, I came here because Linux from Scratch is switching to grub for version 5; and I make a bootable CD to distribute it. I suppose the brutal answer is that I do not care if grub does not work; (being unable to boot a CD is a major failure from my perspective). The previous versions have used lilo. After version 5, I can change to another bootloader; and recommend that we drop grub. I think that you should decide a strategy. Does grub exist solely for Debian/Hurd; or do you want to become a "global" boot loader? Chris _______________________________________________ Bug-grub mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-grub
