Ian Campbell wrote: > On Sat, 2010-10-02 at 02:49 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> Philipp Kern wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 03:56:13PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: >>>> Now, I hope someone from the release team will answer this: if we build >>>> a new xen-pv-grub package, will it be accepted by the RT, even if we are >>>> late, as the lack of pv-grub in the xen-utils can be considered a >>>> regression in Squeeze (as Lenny had the feature)? >>> AFAICS there was no pv-grub in Lenny: >>> >>> pk...@franck:~/ftp/ftp/dists/lenny$ zgrep pv-grub Contents-amd64.gz >>> Contents-i386.gz >>> pk...@franck:~/ftp/ftp/dists/lenny$ >>> >>> If this is the case, there's no regression. Furthermore this is a bug of >>> severity:wishlist, so no, it would be too late for this. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Philipp Kern >> Considering that here: >> >> http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/PvGrub >> >> it's written that PvGrub is replacing pygrub, > > Replacing is rather strong. They serve similar purposes but its entirely > up to user preference and/or requirements which one is used. They > certainly aren't mutually exclusive or anything like that and pygrub is > not going away upstream any time soon.
Replacing isn't my wording. Should the wiki be changed? What's the advantages/differences of pv-grub compared to pygrub then? What is the point in having 2 p*grub that do the same thing? >> and that in Lenny (unless there's still pygrub in Squeeze, > > pygrub _is_ in squeeze: > $ dpkg -S /usr/lib/xen-*/bin/pygrub > xen-utils-4.0: /usr/lib/xen-4.0/bin/pygrub > > I haven't seen any suggestion, from Bastian or otherwise, that it will > be removed. > > I don't believe pvgrub was in Lenny. > > Ian. Cool, thanks for clarifying this. I run outdated self-backported version of Bastian's packages (shame on me...), which is why I wasn't sure. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
