Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, "please test grub2")

Daniel Baumann writes: > On 05/24/2010 11:29 AM, Ferenc Wagner wrote: > >> You may want to try extlinux, it works much like LILO in this respect. >> It lacks a convenient configuration system, but that of grub-legacy >> would be easy to adapt, and I actually plan to work on

Re: new lilo package maintainer? (was lilo removal in squeeze or please test grub2)

On 07/06/2010 17:37, Stephen Powell wrote: But for a kernel install or reconfigure, it is the responsibility of the kernel maintainer scripts to invoke the bootloader. See also, for example, linux-image-2.6.26-2-s390.postinst, where zipl is assigned as the bootloader on line 38. This really

Re: new lilo package maintainer? (was lilo removal in squeeze or please test grub2)

On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 13:39 +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote: On 07/06/2010 17:37, Stephen Powell wrote: But for a kernel install or reconfigure, it is the responsibility of the kernel maintainer scripts to invoke the bootloader. See also, for example, linux-image-2.6.26-2-s390.postinst, where

Re: new lilo package maintainer? (was lilo removal in squeeze or please test grub2)

On Tue, 08 Jun 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 13:39 +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote: On 07/06/2010 17:37, Stephen Powell wrote: But for a kernel install or reconfigure, it is the responsibility of the kernel maintainer scripts to invoke the bootloader. See also, for

Re: new lilo package maintainer? (was lilo removal in squeeze or please test grub2)

On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 14:00 +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote: On Tue, 08 Jun 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 13:39 +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote: On 07/06/2010 17:37, Stephen Powell wrote: But for a kernel install or reconfigure, it is the responsibility of the kernel

Re: new lilo package maintainer? (was lilo removal in squeeze or please test grub2)

On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 07:39:58 -0400 (EDT), Vincent Danjean wrote: On 07/06/2010 17:37, Stephen Powell wrote: But for a kernel install or reconfigure, it is the responsibility of the kernel maintainer scripts to invoke the bootloader. See also, for example, linux-image-2.6.26-2-s390.postinst,

new lilo package maintainer? (was lilo removal in squeeze or please test grub2)

On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 03:22:46 -0400 (EDT), sean finney wrote: On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 01:44:05AM +0400, William Pitcock wrote: Have fun. When you have a release that actually has merit, it can be reconsidered for inclusion in Debian. In the meantime, the original plan continues. actually,

Re: new lilo package maintainer? (was lilo removal in squeeze or please test grub2)

reassign 505609 initramfs-tools thanks Hi Stephen, thanks for stepping up maintaining lilo in Debian! I hope you'll manage this well. On Montag, 7. Juni 2010, Stephen Powell wrote: Perhaps I can offer a solution here. Since William obviously doesn't wish to maintain this package any longer,

Re: new lilo package maintainer? (was lilo removal in squeeze or please test grub2)

On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 10:33:52 -0400 (EDT), Holger Levsen wrote: Hi Stephen, thanks for stepping up maintaining lilo in Debian! I hope you'll manage this well. Um, thanks; but I don't understand the reassignment of bug number 505609 to package initramfs-tools. If you read my previous posts

Re: Re (2): lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Wed, 26 May 2010, Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: You're missing the point. The main selling point to management is that Linux is free. If they have to buy new backup software in order to accommodate Linux' backup requirements, that will kill it on the spot. Whatever boot

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 11:08:21AM +0100, Chris Carr wrote: On 25/05/2010 10:00, Harald Braumann wrote: On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 10:39:52PM -0500, William Pitcock wrote: (4) Users need to test grub2 now. I've been using grub2 for quite some time now on several different systems with mixed

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:56:38 +0200, Josip Rodin j...@entuzijast.net wrote: So all this lilo needs to die now, everyone quickly get grub2 talk does look a fair bit premature. Cynics might say amateurish or worse, YMMV. grub2 won't magically get better if we just throw more users at it. I fully

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 10:25 PM, Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de wrote: I fully agree. The grub situation is as with KDE: Old version abandoned, new version not finished. Not exactly. I was testing KDE4 since 3.97 and it was quite interesting and amusing. Not many people like to test

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 04:51:09PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote: Right, but also note that there's an open RFH on grub2 #248397 (retitled/refreshed recently, despite the low bug number). As long as there are tested-and-ready-to-apply[1] patches rotting away in the BTS without any comments, I

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 04:43:32PM -0400, Stephen Powell wrote: On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:40:41 -0400 (EDT), Andreas Barth wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: On Sat, 22 May 2010 23:39:52 -0400 (EDT), William Pitcock wrote: After some discussion about lilo on #debian-devel in IRC, it has pretty

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Fri, 28 May 2010 16:44:11 -0400 (EDT), Peter Samuelson wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: It *does* recognize lilo and has special logic to patch lilo after the restore so that the machine will boot. So can this software be fooled into thinking it is dealing with lilo? Would it be sufficient

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Sun, 23 May 2010 16:26:48 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org wrote: On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 02:08:59PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote: This also means that the grub2 maintainers (both Debian and Upstream) need to work on the regressions that exist in regard to moving from lilo or grub legacy

Re: Re (2): lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Tue, 25 May 2010 11:42:34 -0400 (EDT), Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: You're missing the point. The main selling point to management is that Linux is free. If they have to buy new backup software in order to accommodate Linux' backup requirements, that will kill it on the spot.

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

* Stephen Powell (zlinux...@wowway.com) [100523 21:21]: On Sat, 22 May 2010 23:39:52 -0400 (EDT), William Pitcock wrote: After some discussion about lilo on #debian-devel in IRC, it has pretty much been determined that kernel sizes have crossed the line past where lilo can reliably

Re: Re (2): lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Sat, 29 May 2010 10:51:10 -0400 (EDT), Marc Haber wrote: On Tue, 25 May 2010 11:42:34 -0400 (EDT), Stephen Powell wrote: You're missing the point. The main selling point to management is that Linux is free. If they have to buy new backup software in order to accommodate Linux' backup

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:40:41 -0400 (EDT), Andreas Barth wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: On Sat, 22 May 2010 23:39:52 -0400 (EDT), William Pitcock wrote: After some discussion about lilo on #debian-devel in IRC, it has pretty much been determined that kernel sizes have crossed the line past where

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Tue, 25 May 2010 13:12:27 -0400 (EDT), Stephen Powell wrote: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: No software is entirely without cost ... volunteers work on whatever they like ... your specific requirements may differ from their goals ... volunteers are rarely concerned with market share ...

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Le vendredi 28 mai 2010 à 10:45 -0400, Stephen Powell a écrit : Unfortunately, logical backups of a Linux machine using the extlinux boot loader do not work with our backup/restore software. The master boot record and partition boot sector are restored correctly, but

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

[Stephen Powell] It *does* recognize lilo and has special logic to patch lilo after the restore so that the machine will boot. So can this software be fooled into thinking it is dealing with lilo? Would it be sufficient to rename /boot/extlinux/extlinux.sys to /boot/maps or something? --

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

In gmane.linux.debian.devel.general Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: But like lilo it stays out of unallocated (and therefore not backed up) sectors. The boot block of extlinux is installed in the boot sector of a partition, and the second stage loader occupies a file within the

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Samuel Thibault sthiba...@debian.org writes: Paul Vojta, le Thu 27 May 2010 00:47:14 +, a écrit : In article enjn8-64s...@gated-at.bofh.it, Ferenc Wagner wf...@niif.hu wrote: Sorry, I don't trust in the future of LILO myself. If there's anything which only LILO can do, I recommend you

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 07:10:37PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 06:13:13PM +0200, Jordi Mallach wrote: Colin added himself to the Uploaders field when I requested him to do so, as he's been in charge of Ubuntu's switch to GRUB2 for Ubuntu and after the

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

2010/5/26 Joachim Wiedorn ad_deb...@joonet.de: Harald Braumann ha...@unheit.net wrote on Tue, 25 May 2010: On simple standard system -- one disk, one kernel in /boot, no fancy stuff -- it works quite well. This is enough to use grub2 for new installing of Debian. On other systems it often

extlinux (was: Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2))

Daniel Baumann dan...@debian.org writes: as of current git, you can now use EXTLINUX_UPDATE=false in /etc/default/extlinux to prevent having update-extlinux do anything. That's the single feature I misseded. Thanks. Although it would be even better if it was possible to include some fixed

Re: extlinux (was: Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2))

Bjørn Mork, le Wed 26 May 2010 10:45:49 +0200, a écrit : Just comparing http://git.kernel.org/?p=boot/syslinux/syslinux.git with http://bzr.savannah.gnu.org/r/grub/trunk/grub/ should IMHO give more than enough information to choose extlinux over grub2 I don't understand what you mean here.

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Wed, 26 May 2010 00:23:04 -0400 (EDT), Daniel Baumann wrote: On 05/26/2010 03:36 AM, Stephen Powell wrote: ... That works for now; but if a package upgrade for extlinux is ever downloaded, I'm afraid that new versions of the hook scripts will be copied into these directories which are

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

In article enjn8-64s...@gated-at.bofh.it, Ferenc Wagner wf...@niif.hu wrote: Sorry, I don't trust in the future of LILO myself. If there's anything which only LILO can do, I recommend you start complaining on the Syslinux and the Grub mailing lists. I suppose it will be heard. Does either

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Paul Vojta, le Thu 27 May 2010 00:47:14 +, a écrit : In article enjn8-64s...@gated-at.bofh.it, Ferenc Wagner wf...@niif.hu wrote: Sorry, I don't trust in the future of LILO myself. If there's anything which only LILO can do, I recommend you start complaining on the Syslinux and the

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Hi, On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 10:39:52PM -0500, William Pitcock wrote: (4) Users need to test grub2 now. I've been using grub2 for quite some time now on several different systems with mixed success. On simple standard system -- one disk, one kernel in /boot, no fancy stuff -- it works quite

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On 25/05/2010 10:00, Harald Braumann wrote: Hi, On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 10:39:52PM -0500, William Pitcock wrote: (4) Users need to test grub2 now. I've been using grub2 for quite some time now on several different systems with mixed success. [snip] Because of this, coupled with the many

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Hello, On 05/23/2010 03:44 PM, Julien BLACHE wrote: Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk wrote: Hi, Working fine here on i386, whether booting a stock kernel (testing with 2.6.33 from experimental) or a custom kernel. I've not checked a stock kernel on amd64 for some time now,

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Ferenc Wagner wrote: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: Both grub-legacy and grub-pc use sectors on the hard disk outside of the master boot record and outside of a partition ... You may want to try extlinux, it works much like LILO in this respect. Well, I tried extlinux last

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Tue, 25 May 2010 07:08:20 -0400 (EDT), Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote: William Pitcock neno...@dereferenced.org wrote: This bug *can* be fixed, but not without a significant rewrite of the way that lilo's stage2 loader code works. Given that there is no active upstream and that the Debian

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:22:13AM -0400, Stephen Powell wrote: [snip] Speaking of documentation, that seems to be its main weakness. Documentation is sketchy and spread out over a number of different files. I would have had a hard time configuring it if it weren't for correct guesses based

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: Ferenc Wagner wrote: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: Both grub-legacy and grub-pc use sectors on the hard disk outside of the master boot record and outside of a partition ... You may want to try extlinux, it works much like LILO in

Re: Re (2): lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Mon, 24 May 2010 17:29:54 -0400 (EDT), Peter Easthope wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: (3) The need for special backup requirements will be used by the opponents of Linux at my place of employment to oppose further deployments of Linux, ... What about the carrot approach? Find an even

Re: Re (2): lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.comwrote: On Mon, 24 May 2010 17:29:54 -0400 (EDT), Peter Easthope wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: (3) The need for special backup requirements will be used by the opponents of Linux at my place of employment to oppose further

Re: Re (2): lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Tue, 25 May 2010 11:51:11 -0400 (EDT), Mark mamar...@gmail.com On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.comwrote: On Mon, 24 May 2010 17:29:54 -0400 (EDT), Peter Easthope wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: (3) The need for special backup requirements will be used by the

Re: Re (2): lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Tue, 25 May 2010 12:03:17 -0400 (EDT), Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: You're missing the point. The main selling point to management is that Linux is free. No software is entirely without cost. Free Software is no exception. There are usually no up-front

Re (3): lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

From: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 11:42:34 -0400 (EDT) The backup people are Windows people, and they'd love an excuse to complain to management about the backup requirements of my Linux servers. Implies that you don't have responsibility for backing the

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Harald Braumann ha...@unheit.net wrote on Tue, 25 May 2010: On simple standard system -- one disk, one kernel in /boot, no fancy stuff -- it works quite well. This is enough to use grub2 for new installing of Debian. On other systems it often breaks miserably. Updates leave my system

Re: Re (2): lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Original Message From: zlinux...@wowway.com To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-u...@lists.debian.org, debian-b...@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Re (2): lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2) Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 13:00:45 -0400 (EDT) On Tue, 25 May 2010 11:51:11

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Tue, 25 May 2010 11:10:38 -0400 (EDT), Ferenc Wagner wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: ... I installed the mbr package ... The extlinux package itself also contains an mbr.bin, which you can use (it's strong point is probably EBIOS support). So it does. Well, I've now installed extlinux'

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On 05/26/2010 03:36 AM, Stephen Powell wrote: That works for now; but if a package upgrade for extlinux is ever downloaded, I'm afraid that new versions of the hook scripts will be copied into these directories which are marked executable, and my hand-made configuration file will get wiped

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Quoting Stanislav Maslovski (stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com): Nobody cares if you are opposed to it. Unless you are offering to become lilo upstream, it's going away. That is why I love reading d-dev. Some debian developers are so good at argumentation! Everybody has time constraints and

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On 2010-05-24, Florian Zagler florianzag...@web.de wrote: Don't drop lilo in squeeze but mark it orphaned. Leave it in Squeeze and schedule the removal for Squeeze+1. Orphaned packages in a release are a pain if nobody steps up to fix RC bugs suddenly popping up in stable. Kind regards,

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Kurt Roeckx k...@roeckx.be writes: On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 01:11:48PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: William Pitcock neno...@dereferenced.org (22/05/2010): This means that users should *test grub2 extensively* before Squeeze is released so that any issues can be resolved now. There should

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: Both grub-legacy and grub-pc use sectors on the hard disk outside of the master boot record [...] This breaks the design of the backup software that my employer uses. This backup software backs up the master boot record and all partitions; but

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Mon, 24 May 2010 05:36:32 -0400 (EDT), Ferenc Wagner wrote: Kurt Roeckx k...@roeckx.be wrote: On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 01:11:48PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: William Pitcock neno...@dereferenced.org (22/05/2010): This means that users should *test grub2 extensively* before Squeeze is

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On moandei 24 Maaie 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote: yes, keeping lilo in the archive is a burden for some other people (security team, I would like to correct the suggestion that the security team would oppose keeping lilo in squeeze. There is currently no such objection, and in the past the

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Mon, 24 May 2010 05:29:56 -0400 (EDT), Ferenc Wagner wrote: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: Both grub-legacy and grub-pc use sectors on the hard disk outside of the master boot record [...] This breaks the design of the backup software that my employer uses. This backup

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

[Please Cc: replies, I'm not subscribed to debian-devel ] Stephen Powell wrote: What about Jordi Mallach and Colin Watson? The package page for grub-pc lists them as maintainers too. Have they disappeared as well? Or are they no longer maintainers for this package? In which case their

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 06:13:13PM +0200, Jordi Mallach wrote: Colin added himself to the Uploaders field when I requested him to do so, as he's been in charge of Ubuntu's switch to GRUB2 for Ubuntu and after the disappearance of Felix and Robert, he's the Debian person with more experience to

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Mon, 24 May 2010, Stephen Powell wrote: To the best of my knowledge, it is the *only* bootloader which supports setting an initial text video mode *and* does not use any sectors outside the master boot record and outside of a partition. If I'm wrong about that, someone please correct me.

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: On Mon, 24 May 2010 05:36:32 -0400 (EDT), Ferenc Wagner wrote: Kurt Roeckx k...@roeckx.be wrote: On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 01:11:48PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: William Pitcock neno...@dereferenced.org (22/05/2010): This means that users should

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: On Mon, 24 May 2010 05:29:56 -0400 (EDT), Ferenc Wagner wrote: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: Both grub-legacy and grub-pc use sectors on the hard disk outside of the master boot record [...] You may want to try extlinux, it works

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:01:30 -0400 (EDT), Edward Allcutt wrote: On Mon, 24 May 2010, Stephen Powell wrote: To the best of my knowledge, lilo is the *only* bootloader which supports setting an initial text video mode *and* does not use any sectors outside the master boot record and outside of a

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On 05/24/2010 11:29 AM, Ferenc Wagner wrote: You may want to try extlinux, it works much like LILO in this respect. It lacks a convenient configuration system, but that of grub-legacy would be easy to adapt, and I actually plan to work on this. sometime ago i've added extliux-install and

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:38:55 -0400 (EDT), Ferenc Wagner wrote: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: On Mon, 24 May 2010 05:29:56 -0400 (EDT), Ferenc Wagner wrote: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: Both grub-legacy and grub-pc use sectors on the hard disk outside of the master

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: On Mon, 24 May 2010 13:38:55 -0400 (EDT), Ferenc Wagner wrote: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: On Mon, 24 May 2010 05:29:56 -0400 (EDT), Ferenc Wagner wrote: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com writes: Both grub-legacy and grub-pc use

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Le dimanche 23 mai 2010 à 20:48 -0400, Stephen Powell a écrit : I do understand why a Debian package maintainer does not wish to become upstream. And I hope that someone who is both willing and able to do so steps up to the plate. But withdrawing it from the distribution seems like overkill

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Le lundi 24 mai 2010 à 20:46 +0200, Daniel Baumann a écrit : On 05/24/2010 11:29 AM, Ferenc Wagner wrote: You may want to try extlinux, it works much like LILO in this respect. It lacks a convenient configuration system, but that of grub-legacy would be easy to adapt, and I actually plan

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Daniel Baumann dan...@debian.org writes: On 05/24/2010 11:29 AM, Ferenc Wagner wrote: You may want to try extlinux, it works much like LILO in this respect. It lacks a convenient configuration system, but that of grub-legacy would be easy to adapt, and I actually plan to work on this.

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On 05/24/2010 10:07 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote: Could this also be eventually added as an alternative to grub2 in the installer? i've talked with otavio about this already a year ago, as i'm much in favour[0] of extlinux over grub2 anyway, but i didn't got arround to finally push it. if anyone

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

I demand that Ferenc Wagner may or may not have written... [snip] You may want to try extlinux, it works much like LILO in this respect. It lacks a convenient configuration system, but that of grub-legacy would be easy to adapt, and I actually plan to work on this. Given an upload of a 4.00

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

(Dropping -release, which isn't a discussion list.) William Pitcock neno...@dereferenced.org (22/05/2010): Given that there is no active upstream and that the Debian lilo package carries many patches for bug fixes that are alleviated by standardizing on grub2, this seems like the best option

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 01:11:48PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: William Pitcock neno...@dereferenced.org (22/05/2010): This means that users should *test grub2 extensively* before Squeeze is released so that any issues can be resolved now. There should also be some folks fixing the

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

I demand that William Pitcock may or may not have written... After some discussion about lilo on #debian-devel in IRC, it has pretty much been determined that kernel sizes have crossed the line past where lilo can reliably determine the payload size. Working fine here on i386, whether booting

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk wrote: Hi, Working fine here on i386, whether booting a stock kernel (testing with 2.6.33 from experimental) or a custom kernel. I've not checked a stock kernel on amd64 for some time now, but I've seen no problems with my custom kernels (which

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Sat, 22 May 2010 22:39:52 -0500, William Pitcock neno...@dereferenced.org wrote: This means that users should *test grub2 extensively* before Squeeze is released so that any issues can be resolved now. This also means that the grub2 maintainers (both Debian and Upstream) need to work on the

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 02:08:59PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote: This also means that the grub2 maintainers (both Debian and Upstream) need to work on the regressions that exist in regard to moving from lilo or grub legacy to grub2. There are too many bug reports in the BTS which are completely

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

I demand that Julien BLACHE may or may not have written... Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk wrote: Working fine here on i386, whether booting a stock kernel (testing with 2.6.33 from experimental) or a custom kernel. I've not checked a stock kernel on amd64 for some time now, but

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk wrote: Hi, Working fine here on i386, whether booting a stock kernel (testing with 2.6.33 from experimental) or a custom kernel. I've not checked a stock kernel on amd64 for some time now, but I've seen no problems with my custom kernels (which

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Sat, 22 May 2010 23:39:52 -0400 (EDT), William Pitcock wrote: After some discussion about lilo on #debian-devel in IRC, it has pretty much been determined that kernel sizes have crossed the line past where lilo can reliably determine the payload size. This bug *can* be fixed, but not

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Hi, - Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: (blah blah blah blah) Nobody cares if you are opposed to it. Unless you are offering to become lilo upstream, it's going away. William -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe.

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:11:30AM +0400, William Pitcock wrote: Hi, - Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: (blah blah blah blah) Nobody cares if you are opposed to it. Unless you are offering to become lilo upstream, it's going away. That is why I love reading d-dev. Some

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Sun, 23 May 2010 16:11:30 -0400 (EDT), William Pitcock wrote: Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: (blah blah blah blah) Nobody cares if you are opposed to it. Unless you are offering to become lilo upstream, it's going away. William I do understand why a Debian package

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Sun, 23 May 2010, Stephen Powell wrote: But withdrawing it from the distribution seems like overkill to me, especially since you want to withdraw it from Squeeze and not Squeeze+1. Lilo, as it exists today, works just fine for my purposes. If the maintainer doesn't wish to maintain it for

Re: lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

On Monday, 24. May 2010, Stephen Powell wrote: I do understand why a Debian package maintainer does not wish to become upstream. And I hope that someone who is both willing and able to do so steps up to the plate. But withdrawing it from the distribution seems like overkill to me, especially

lilo removal in squeeze (or, please test grub2)

Hi, After some discussion about lilo on #debian-devel in IRC, it has pretty much been determined that kernel sizes have crossed the line past where lilo can reliably determine the payload size. This bug *can* be fixed, but not without a significant rewrite of the way that lilo's stage2 loader