> IMHO, if the design of a software package sucks, it isn't worth
> improving, even if the implementation is elegant, beautiful, simple,
> and smart. Especially when the goal is different from yours, there is
> no point where you can contribute.
>
> That's why I started BugCommunicator. I surveyed
I'm posting this to see if anyone's interested in a simple mod I made to
grub 0.92 that allows grub to boot a system w/ no video board taking
advantage of grub's serial port capabilities.
I basically disabled output to the screen via INT calls in stage1 and
stage1.5.
On my system that has no vide
Barry Skidmore writes:
> I have Linux (Red Hat 7.2) installed on internal IDE drive 1 (hda) and
> Windows XP installed on internal IDE slave drive 4 (hdd). Below is the
> grub.conf file I am using. However, when I try to boot Windows XP, I
> receive an error 21 ("the selected disk can not
At 29 Oct 2002 10:19:03 -0500,
Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> I certainly appreciate these arguments, however, I would appreciate it
> (as I think would others) if you could briefly enumerate what
> separates bugcomm from the others. That is, which design issues does
> bugcomm try to correct; just call
=== BUG #1552: FULL BUG SNAPSHOT ===
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailbug&bug_id=1552&group_id=68
Submitted by: cwilkes Project: GNU GRUB
Submitted on: 2002-Oct-30 01:48
Category: Network Severit
