Peter Humphrey posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Wed, 07 Dec 2005 14:30:42 +0000:
> On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 08:20:36 -0700 > Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Question. If I do so, will grub still compile for me, or will I have to >> use grub-static (I /guess/ that's the binary-only ebuild?)? > > I haven't been able to get the 64-bit version to install on my box, so > I've been using grub-static anyway. I decided not to make a fuss about it, > since I can't see that I lose anything by using the statically compiled > version :-) Thanks, everyone. I haven't yet decided whether I want to go 64-bit only, but I've decided being unable to compile grub and therefore having to use grub-static, on its own, isn't a big enough issue to stop me going 64-bit only, if that's what I decide to do. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- [email protected] mailing list
