On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 2:21 PM Bruce Dubbs <bruce.du...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 4/20/21 12:50 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 1:34 PM Didier Spaier <did...@slint.fr> wrote: > >> So, it's hard to understand for many end users that: > >> > >> 1. The issue appeared after gcc-10 began to be used, well after the > >> release of grub 2.04. > >> 2. It has been fixed long ago. > >> 3. But for the fix to be effective one of these conditions should be met: > >> a. A new grub version has been released and is provided by the > >> distribution they use. > >> b. The distributon they use patches the source of GRUB 2.04 to bring the > >> fix. > >> c. The distribution they use provides a package build from a source > >> pulled from with the patch already committed. > >> > >> Unfortunately if none of these conditions is met many users tend > >> to blame GRUB instead of the distributions and go saying in fora "I'll > >> avoid to use GRUB, it's broken" > > > > My 2 cents: > > > > If a distro starts shipping a new version of GCC, they should really > > test their packages first and patch them as needed. > > > > If an end user installs a new version of GCC manually, I would hope > > they are smart enough to know that it might break things. > > > > If an end user builds GRUB manually, they are also responsible for > > applying any patches that are necessary for their toolchain. > > And my two cents: > > Actively maintained packages like GRUB should make releases more often > than every 2-4 years. GCC is on a schedule to produce stable releases > twice a year. GRUB should release new stable releases at least as often.
I would also like to see more frequent releases. However, I recognize that GRUB has a very conservative release/testing process, and the developers have limited time available. _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
