On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 5:09 AM, Gerhard Brauer wrote:

On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 09:18:48PM +0100, Gerhard Brauer wrote:

...

There must be patches for grub to provide this (???)

Ok, i've filed 2 feature request to maybe solve these problem. #9864, #9865

Gerhard

Seems like it'd be a much better idea to just recompile it yourself, considering I have no idea what GPT partition tables are and no one else seems to really care....... But, it looks like we already have a new grub package. sigh

On Dienstag, 18. März 2008 17:19 Joe Phantom wrote:

...

Seems like it'd be a much better idea to just recompile it yourself, considering I have no idea what GPT partition tables are and no one else seems to really care.......

I think macbook's hardrive is the most common example of a HD using GPT partition tables by default.

Because the gentoo bugreport results in a second bugreport which is a sideeffect of this action i get a little bit nervous because the worst case would be that after a upgrade of grub only Intel Mac's boots and the other of us have a problem.-)

Macbook Debian Wiki has some info about GPT + GRUB: http://wiki.debian.org/MacBook

Is it so that Debian offers different install cd's? Could it that this will be the safer way instead of risking too much with a so much important package? See you, Attila

On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 11:00:33AM -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:

On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 5:09 AM, Gerhard Brauer wrote:

...

Ok, i've filed 2 feature request to maybe solve these problem. #9864, #9865

But, it looks like we already have a new grub package. sigh

(Sorry for not so good english) ;-) I saw your answers and discussions also in arch-devel. I agree to keep stable things stable, but also life goes on. Grub's great benefit over lilo is its flexibility, but therefor grub must known any partition scheme and filesystem where it should find the kernels. GPT/EFI is meanwhile a standard (i doesn't thought on the Mac users by my request), we support it also in our kernels. I also agree that not most of the users cry "hurray" when gpt is supported but devices/arrays where one needs partitions beyond 2TB is not so far "feature dreams" as for ~10 years. Buy a bunch of SATA-HDs and a HW-Raid-Controller and you're "in buisiness". But for those who needs this we could provide a installation procedure without an error ("I coudn't install Arch, grub throws an error"). Looking over other distributions i see no harm when using grub with a gpt-patch. And it's "only" in testing, test it. If you devs say: no, we dont't want to apply this; no problem, it was a feature request. I assume that someone who benefits at the moment from this patch also has the expirience to solve it an other way: * use Lilo if want a bootloader straight after installation * use a external boot medium for the first boot and then build grub from abs with the patch or from AUR, it's done in 5 minutes. But if 99% of our users never see anything good (or bad!) with a so patched grub - and the 1% users benefit from it - then i would like to see it in Arch. Gerhard -- Never use a running system...