On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 12:41:47 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hello Ard!
>
> On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 16:29 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > > Feel free to keep using it, but please stop demanding that our people
> > > > keep wasting their time on it. If you want to support it in
On 2023-05-12 05:49, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 00:41, matoro
wrote:
On 2023-05-11 18:09, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 20:59, matoro
> wrote:
>>
>> On 2023-05-11 10:29, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> > On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 15:34, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
>> >
Hi,
> - we decide that GRUB 2.xx (whichever was the most recent release at
> the time of the decision) is good enough to boot Linux on ia64 for the
> remaining life time of the architecture, and remove it from the GRUB
> tree.
That looks like the most reasonable option to me.
Note that ia64
On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 12:42, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
>
> Hello Ard!
>
> On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 16:29 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > > Feel free to keep using it, but please stop demanding that our people
> > > > keep wasting their time on it. If you want to support it in Debian,
> >
Hello Ard!
On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 16:29 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > Feel free to keep using it, but please stop demanding that our people
> > > keep wasting their time on it. If you want to support it in Debian,
> > > you can carry it as a downstream patch and shoulder the maintenance
> > >
On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 00:41, matoro
wrote:
>
> On 2023-05-11 18:09, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 20:59, matoro
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2023-05-11 10:29, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 15:34, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 12:09:14AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Thanks, this could be helpful if we manage to find people that have
> the bandwidth to keep working on this. Would you be willing to spend
> time and development effort yourself on building and installing GRUB
> from the upstream
On 2023-05-11 18:09, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 20:59, matoro
wrote:
On 2023-05-11 10:29, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 15:34, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 14:17 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> > On Thu, 11 May 2023 at
On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 20:59, matoro
wrote:
>
> On 2023-05-11 10:29, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 15:34, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 14:17 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 14:14, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> >>
On 2023-05-11 10:29, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 15:34, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 14:17 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 14:14, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 14:06 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel
On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 15:34, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 14:17 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 14:14, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 14:06 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > > Itanium IA-64 support is
On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 14:17 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 14:14, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 14:06 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > Itanium IA-64 support is obsolete, and implements its own flavor of EFI
> > > boot that deviates from
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 02:17:57PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 14:14, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 14:06 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> > Itanium IA-64 support is obsolete, and implements its own flavor of EFI
>> > boot that deviates from
On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 14:14, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 14:06 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > Itanium IA-64 support is obsolete, and implements its own flavor of EFI
> > boot that deviates from other architectures. Given that IA64 is unused
> > and unmaintained,
On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 14:06 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Itanium IA-64 support is obsolete, and implements its own flavor of EFI
> boot that deviates from other architectures. Given that IA64 is unused
> and unmaintained, it makes no sense to pretend that the EFI changes we
> are making are
Itanium IA-64 support is obsolete, and implements its own flavor of EFI
boot that deviates from other architectures. Given that IA64 is unused
and unmaintained, it makes no sense to pretend that the EFI changes we
are making are tested or supported on IA64, so let's just get rid of it.
16 matches
Mail list logo
