On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 23:46 +0100, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: > > The critical thing is how to reduce new things that people would have to > study > for using a program. GRUB Legacy made a mistake, since nearly all operating > systems use 0-based for disks, and 1-based for partitions.
Since I'm used to Linux, which assigns disks letters rather than numbers, I was unaware that other OSs like BSD number disks from 0. Since that's the case, and neither 0 nor 1 will make sense to people expecting "a", I'm OK with 0. > Now, some people say that this is inconsistent against GRUB Legacy. OK. I > admit it. But which is more important in a long run: easy for existing users > to migrate to GRUB 2, or easy for new comers to adapt GRUB 2? How difficult > is it that existing users know GRUB now follows the same rule as others? How > difficult is it that beginners study a rule different from others, so not > intuitive at all? Yes, I definitely agree with the decision to number partitions from 1. (Hopefully we can do the same with menu entries too. :) Making this change at a time when the config file syntax changes is the only good opportunity. -Hollis _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel