Hi, On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 1:02 AM, Robert Millan <r...@aybabtu.com> wrote: > Well, you have the freedom to disagree with anything we do and bring your > customized GRUB to a different direction :-) > > Anyhow, my priority for GRUB is strong driver-based support. We could recruit > someone to develop the framework in next year's GSoC (unless somebody steps > in, of course).
Why stop there? If proprietory ethernet ROMs aren't good enough, then what about proprietory SCSI ROMs, and proprietory firmware/BIOS? Surely a boot manager wouldn't be a good manager if it didn't include it's own replacements for all of these things; and perhaps it should also include it's own replacement for proprietory OS's too... Why are you worrying about such silly things when the multi-boot specification (which actually is relevant) is still severely borked? > The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and > how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we > still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all." Sigh. I think I understand now - lack of logical thinking leads to lack of rational behavior. "Our data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) other people may access our data (potentially including allowing them to lease it under terms and conditions that include DRM, if they agree to these terms and conditions)" Cheers, Brendan _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
