On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Ionut Biru <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 06/24/2012 10:51 PM, Ronald van Haren wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Tobias Powalowski
>> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> 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.
>>> Tobias Powalowski
>>> Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa)
>> 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.
. You can convert menu.lst/grub.conf to grub.cfg using
grub-menulst2cfg. But since grub1 files will be removed from
/boot/grub, that may lead to non-bootable system, unless the user
installs grub2 to the MBR using grub-install.
> 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.