On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Ionut Biru <ibiru@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 06/24/2012 10:51 PM, Ronald van Haren wrote:
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Tobias Powalowski <tobias.powalowski@googlemail.com> wrote:
HI https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2012-06/msg00071.html grub2 will hit final status soon, should packages be renamed then? Any plan how to handle this. Imho we move grub-legacy to aur or at least extra then.
Thanks greetings tpowa
-- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@archlinux.org
I was about to post a similar message...
Anyway, I was planning to drop support of grub1. There has been no upstream for a long time and all newer features are patched in or require additional patches. I don't see a need to have it in [extra] as grub-legacy. No problem uploading it to AUR so people can continue to use it if they want, although you need i686 to build it so that could be the only reason to keep it in [extra] for a bit...
I've seen no major breakages in grub2 since beta2 iirc. Upstream development has been going towards stability in recent betas and I would consider it stable at the moment: there were no real bug reports in the bugtracker for the last few months.
I'd like to move 2.00 to [core] via [testing] when it is released, letting the grub-bios (atm grub2-bios) replace the old grub package. Adding an install message and a news item is probably a good idea at the time.
Do not replace grub. Most users won't read the pacman output and the configuration syntax was changed, resulting in a non booting system.
Let them move to grub-bios.
I'll be pushing grub2 rc1 to [testing] in a moment if you want to give it a try. Final 2.00 release should be in one of the next days.
Cheers, Ronald
-- Ionuț
Well sure, but grub-bios will be part of the grub group. Won't it automatically replace the grub package with the group in that case? Ronald