Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: the demise of grub:0

2016-10-14 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
On 14/10/16 10:22 AM, Fernando Rodriguez wrote: > On 10/13/2016 10:21 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: >> On 13/10/16 10:13 AM, Raymond Jennings wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 7:01 AM, Fernando Rodriguez >>> > wrote: >>> >>> On 10/04/2016 06:24

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: the demise of grub:0

2016-10-14 Thread Fernando Rodriguez
On 10/13/2016 10:21 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > On 13/10/16 10:13 AM, Raymond Jennings wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 7:01 AM, Fernando Rodriguez >> > wrote: >> >> On 10/04/2016 06:24 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >> > >> > This would

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: the demise of grub:0

2016-10-13 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
On 13/10/16 10:13 AM, Raymond Jennings wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 7:01 AM, Fernando Rodriguez > > wrote: > > On 10/04/2016 06:24 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > > > > This would actually be another reason to get rid of grub-0, if it

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: the demise of grub:0

2016-10-13 Thread Raymond Jennings
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 7:01 AM, Fernando Rodriguez wrote: > On 10/04/2016 06:24 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > > > > This would actually be another reason to get rid of grub-0, if it can't > > build on one of our profiles, it will more than likely never be fixed > > upstream

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: the demise of grub:0

2016-10-13 Thread Fernando Rodriguez
On 10/04/2016 06:24 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > > This would actually be another reason to get rid of grub-0, if it can't > build on one of our profiles, it will more than likely never be fixed > upstream because they are now focused on grub-2.x. grub-0 is 32-bit software. You could build it

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: the demise of grub:0

2016-10-04 Thread William Hubbs
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 08:44:05PM +, Duncan wrote: > William Hubbs posted on Mon, 03 Oct 2016 16:59:33 -0500 as excerpted: > > > I want to look into removing grub:0 from the tree; here are my thoughts > > on why it should go. > > I don't disagree with the thought, but have some niggles on

[gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: the demise of grub:0

2016-10-04 Thread Duncan
William Hubbs posted on Mon, 03 Oct 2016 16:59:33 -0500 as excerpted: > I want to look into removing grub:0 from the tree; here are my thoughts > on why it should go. I don't disagree with the thought, but have some niggles on the individual points. Note that I'm not nearly as negative on the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: the demise of grub:0

2016-10-04 Thread Nick Vinson
On 10/04/2016 12:45 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote: > -1 > > I'd love to move to grub2 for all of my machines, but it does simply not > work for one of my servers. I can install grub2 and it tells me that > installation and anything else went fine, but when I try to boot with it, it > stops and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: the demise of grub:0

2016-10-04 Thread James Le Cuirot
On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 09:45:35 +0200 Jörg Schaible wrote: > So, what are my options (or other people's options with such > incompatible hardware) without grub 1? Lilo? How about syslinux? -- James Le Cuirot (chewi) Gentoo Linux Developer

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: the demise of grub:0

2016-10-04 Thread Michał Górny
On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 09:45:35 +0200 Jörg Schaible wrote: > -1 > > I'd love to move to grub2 for all of my machines, but it does simply not > work for one of my servers. I can install grub2 and it tells me that > installation and anything else went fine, but when

[gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: the demise of grub:0

2016-10-04 Thread Jörg Schaible
-1 I'd love to move to grub2 for all of my machines, but it does simply not work for one of my servers. I can install grub2 and it tells me that installation and anything else went fine, but when I try to boot with it, it stops and reports me that it found some conflicting area in my bios why