grub-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RFC] Platform information services


From: Robert Millan
Subject: Re: [RFC] Platform information services
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 14:20:57 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 07:03:18PM +0200, Javier Martín wrote:
> El vie, 15-08-2008 a las 19:31 +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen escribió:
> > Javier Martín wrote:
> > > WRT "kernel and modules going hand by hand", think about external
> > > modules: if the drivemap module is finally rejected for introduction in
> > > GRUB, I will not scrap it, but keep it as a module external to the
> > > official GNU sources and possibly offer it in a web in the form of
> > > patches to the official GRUB2. In this case, changes made to the kernel
> > > would not take into account that module, which would break if I weren't
> > > monitoring this list daily.
> > 
> > Then it is really your problem ;)
> Indeed, but bitrot is not just the real of external modules: it's
> happening right now even within the GRUB trunk

We shouldn't compromise GRUB design to work around maintainance problems.  We
don't make any ABI or even API promises, except for Multiboot.  I don't see
why we need this burden simply because some patches take time to be merged.

> as you admit in the
> "Build problems on powerpc" thread...

The problem with the powerpc port is that noone is actively maintaining it.  It
has nothing to do with design decisions.

-- 
Robert Millan

  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."




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]