Re: BugCommunicator as a GRUB BTS

> When I was a young programmer, I thought code was the most > important. But I considered what made GRUB so nice, and I realized there > was a much more important thing, that is to say, a design. How to design > a software package is a much bigger problem than how to > implement it. This is absol

Re: BugCommunicator as a GRUB BTS

At Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:51:42 +0100 (CET), Dr. Tilmann Bubeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, nothing in particular is bad with bugcomm. The only thing is, that > there are already a large number of bug reporting tools. If there is a > special thing, which you don't like about the existing tools,

Re: changes in the Multiboot Specification 0.7

At Mon, 28 Oct 2002 13:14:54 +0100, Ingmar Friedrichsen wrote: > Where can I find a list of changes that would be made in the next Multiboot > Specification. Which parts would be rewriten with more strict words? Entirely. You wouldn't have to care, because their meanings are identical anyway. >

Re: Disconnected from APM

Hi! > > Can you tell me how should the option looks like? > > In the Multiboot header?! > > Maybe, I can implement it... > > Thanks for your offer, but I think it would be easier for me to do > that myself. I'm going to do that really soon, as I now know my work > wouldn't be wasteful. ;) Thank

htp372, only floppy works

Hi there! I mailed last Week or so because grub could not boot my linux from an on board hpt372. I recently got this thing to jump into the mbr of this harddisk an grub loads stage1_5 and then stucks with Error 21... Well, I changed boot order (SCSI/RAID-ATA) and put SCSI and HDD-0 and other dev

Automatic boot works, manual boot does not

I boot Linux 2.4.18 from Grub. The Grub command lines are: root (hd0,4) kernel /vmlinuz-2.4.18-3 ro root=/dev/hda6 hdd=ide-scsi initrd /initrd-2.4.18-3.img If I let the Grub bootloader run automatically, my Linux system boots perfectly. But if I go into the Grub command li

[Bug #1310] Nforce chipsets (A7N266-VM, etc) give error 28

=== BUG #1310: LATEST MODIFICATIONS == http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailbug&bug_id=1310&group_id=68 Changes by: Herbert Gasiorowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 2002-Oct-28 14:29 (GMT) -- Additional Follow-up Comments -

Re: BugCommunicator as a GRUB BTS

> At Mon, 28 Oct 2002 09:14:27 +0100 (CET), > Dr. Tilmann Bubeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> What about bugzilla or mantis (php/mysql)? They are well-known, >> stable, and have a lot of features? > > I'd like to hear your opinion about bugcomm rather than rivals. What is > bad with bugcomm? Wel

Re: BugCommunicator as a GRUB BTS

At Mon, 28 Oct 2002 09:14:27 +0100 (CET), Dr. Tilmann Bubeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What about bugzilla or mantis (php/mysql)? They are well-known, stable, > and have a lot of features? I'd like to hear your opinion about bugcomm rather than rivals. What is bad with bugcomm? Okuji ___

changes in the Multiboot Specification 0.7

Hi! Where can I find a list of changes that would be made in the next Multiboot Specification. Which parts would be rewriten with more strict words? Is the modules part one of them? bye Ingmar Friedrichsen ___ Bug-grub mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: BugCommunicator as a GRUB BTS

What about bugzilla or mantis (php/mysql)? They are well-known, stable, and have a lot of features? Till > As you might know, I have been working on a bug tracking system, > because I don't think that of Savannah is very good for us. It is > named "BugCommunicator" or shortly "bugcomm". The homep