[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Next release?

From: Robert Millan
Subject: Re: Next release?
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:06:24 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 01:32:18AM +0200, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 July 2008 01:21:57 Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 01:15 +0200, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> > > OK. Then how do you install GRUB into (hd1) in a development machine,
> > > which is (hd0) in a booting machine? When GRUB may not correctly
> > > determine BIOS drives, do you want to just give up?
> >
> > The boot drive can be determined at boot.
> >
> > Granted, there are buggy BIOSes, but we handle it already.  All we need
> > is to encode into the bootloader that it was installed on a hard drive
> > (actually, not on a floppy, real or emulated), and the bootloader would
> > use 0x80 rather than the value from BIOS.
> >
> > We don't need specific drive numbers like 0x81.  We need one bit of
> > information, and we can figure it out at the install time.
> 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, even if 
> it is an evil necessity.

Which cases are there that can't be fixed by using UUIDs?

Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What good is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)

reply via email to

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