Am Sat, 30 Jul 2011 00:47:03 +0530 schrieb "KESHAV P.R." <skodabenz@gmail.com>:

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 00:36, KESHAV P.R. <skodabenz@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi,     Please delete grub-gfx https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=2416 . Although it has more votes, I modified the PKGBUILD a bit and replaced the package with grub-legacy-gfx https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=50986 which builds fine in x86_64 system with gcc-multilib. Thanks in advance.

Regards.

Keshav

Bump. anyone?

I would keep grub-gfx and remove grub-legacy-gfx. The package in [core] is also called grub and not grub-legacy. And the source package is also called grub-0.97.tar.gz and not grub-legacy-0.97.tar.gz. So grub-gfx is the better name. Heiko

On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 00:58, Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de> wrote:

Am Sat, 30 Jul 2011 00:47:03 +0530 schrieb "KESHAV P.R." <skodabenz@gmail.com>:

...

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 00:36, KESHAV P.R. <skodabenz@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi,     Please delete grub-gfx https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=2416 . Although it has more votes, I modified the PKGBUILD a bit and replaced the package with grub-legacy-gfx https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=50986 which builds fine in x86_64 system with gcc-multilib. Thanks in advance.

Regards.

Keshav

Bump. anyone?

I would keep grub-gfx and remove grub-legacy-gfx. The package in [core] is also called grub and not grub-legacy. And the source package is also called grub-0.97.tar.gz and not grub-legacy-0.97.tar.gz. So grub-gfx is the better name.

Heiko

I mentioned "current" upstream naming. According to upstream, presently grub2 aka grub 1.9x == grub and grub 0.97 == grub-legacy . I have also submittted a grub-legacy PKGBUILD to Allan for inclusion in official repo (grub itself may be removed from core repo, who knows). The source tarball name won't change upstream as it was generated years back, shortly before grub became grub-legacy. //offnote: I simply bumped this thread since its strange that no one replied to this mail for 4 days. Regards. Keshav

2011/7/29 KESHAV P.R. <skodabenz@gmail.com>

On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 00:58, Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de> wrote:

...

Am Sat, 30 Jul 2011 00:47:03 +0530 schrieb "KESHAV P.R." <skodabenz@gmail.com>:

...

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 00:36, KESHAV P.R. <skodabenz@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi, Please delete grub-gfx https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=2416 . Although it has more votes, I modified the PKGBUILD a bit and replaced the package with grub-legacy-gfx https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=50986 which builds fine in x86_64 system with gcc-multilib. Thanks in advance.

Regards.

Keshav

Bump. anyone?

I would keep grub-gfx and remove grub-legacy-gfx. The package in [core] is also called grub and not grub-legacy. And the source package is also called grub-0.97.tar.gz and not grub-legacy-0.97.tar.gz. So grub-gfx is the better name.

Heiko

I mentioned "current" upstream naming. According to upstream, presently grub2 aka grub 1.9x == grub and grub 0.97 == grub-legacy . I have also submittted a grub-legacy PKGBUILD to Allan for inclusion in official repo (grub itself may be removed from core repo, who knows). The source tarball name won't change upstream as it was generated years back, shortly before grub became grub-legacy.

//offnote: I simply bumped this thread since its strange that no one replied to this mail for 4 days.

Regards.

Keshav

You've got a good, but while grub-legacy is called 'grub' in Archlinux Official repository, I see no need for changing grub-gfx name. If I see grub2, grub and grub-gfx, I would think that grub-gfx have different version than grub2. When/If 'grub' maintainer decide to change it to grub-legacy, I will vote favorable to change name. That's only my 2 cents, anyway. :) Cheers,