On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 02:02:18PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Wednesday 25 April 2007 14:59, Otavio Salvador wrote: > >> We, the GRUB team, want to swtich to GRUB2 due many reasons, basicaly: > >> - better codebase; > > > > Is grub2 fundamentally different from grub, or is it basically based on > > the current grub but just developed further? > > A complete rewrite code.
Note that although it's been rebuilt from scratch, there are many specific portions of code (e.g. filesystems, or lib/device.c device pathname resolver) that have been reintegrated into grub2. > > Do you really mean multi-arch or just "supports more architectures"? It's been redesigned to isolate arch-specific code, making the port to new arches feasible. Currently it supports i386 (and amd64..), powerpc, and sparc64 is being worked on. > > Has grub2 been checked for obvious past issues we've had in grub (like > > /dev/cciss/c0d0 support)? > > It should support. Is difficult to test it without hardware access. This kind of knowlege (about paths to specific devices) used to live in lib/device.c for grub-legacy, and I believe it's all been ported to grub2 (although internaly it's handled very differently). > > Does grub2 solve any of the issues we currently have with grub? > > - xfs support > > Looks like. I wasn't aware of this. Did you try it? > > - lvm support There has been significant work into this area, including a SoC project which AFAIK is now finished and integrated with CVS. I haven't tried any of this myself, though. More at http://grub.enbug.org/LVMandRAID. > > - wrong detection of correct boot device in BIOS Can you be more specific? -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
