Re: Next release?

[Javier Martín]

El mié, 16-07-2008 a las 07:11 -0700, Colin D Bennett escribió:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:52:15 -0400
> Pavel Roskin <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 01:32 +0200, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> > 
> > > If a boot drive is the same as a root drive, you are right.
> > > Otherwise we need to do so.
> > >
> > > I think we have seen tons of examples with GRUB Legacy which may
> > > not be solved automatically in all cases. If one digs into the
> > > archive of bug-grub, I guess several cases would be found easily.
> > > With GRUB 2, we can avoid embedding BIOS drive numbers in many
> > > cases, using UUIDs or labels or files. But this does not always
> > > work, so I am afraid that we need to support device.map, even if it
> > > is an evil necessity.
> > 
> > That's a very advanced setup.  I actually cannot imagine why anyone
> > would use different boot and root drives.  Well, maybe the boot drive
> > has no partitions that GRUB or the host OS can access? 
> 
> I have used machines that have multiple Linux versions spread across
> two drives, but one common /boot partition so they can all be booted
> from GRUB.  This doesn't seem unusual to me.
Same for me: I have the BIOS set up to boot from the second hard drive,
which then becomes (hd0) for GRUB through the BIOS (kinda like what my
proposed drivemap module does), but my /boot partition was on the first
hard drive, which is now (hd1). Took me a bit to realise things, and I
finally had to move around the whole partitioning scheme on the second
hard drive to put /boot in there. 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel

signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente