I am just so surprising that why grub2 in Fedora is 1.98 however the official version is 1.97. In fact grub2 in Fedora is older that official release. Why not follow the official release version? Does Fedora hope that grub2 replaces grub when GNU release grub2-1.98?
I think that grub2 is too complicated for users especially for newbies. Boot loader should be more tiny, just like grub. And Fedora offer a beautiful background for grub. But grub2 has modular design. It looks like that it is easier to add new features and add new filesystem support, such as btrfs support.
--
<url>http://www.liangsuilong.info</url>
Fight for freedom!!!!(3F）
Ask not what your Linux distro can do for you!
Ask what you can do for your Linux distro!
2009/11/3 Liang Suilong <liangsuilong@xxxxxxxxx>
Some Linux distros has migrated from grub-0.97 to grub2-1.97. Grub2 provides more useful features to users. And it is more easy to add a new file system support. But I can not see Fedora has any plan for GRUB2. I read a feature page on Fedora wiki. There is no progress on grub2.Now Fedora official repo offers grub2 package. However the version is quite strange. Fedora provides grub2-1.98. In fact, this version was 1.96 grabbed from svn repo on Aug 27th, 2008. Also, maintainer adds some patches to fix the bug. But GNU released grub2-1.97 just now.In addition, I try to write grub2 into MBR of the HDD. I do not know why. Is there a bug in grub2?
--
<url>http://www.liangsuilong.info</url>
Fight for freedom!!!!(3F）
Ask not what your Linux distro can do for you!
Ask what you can do for your Linux distro!
--
<url>http://www.liangsuilong.info</url>
Fight for freedom!!!!(3F）
Ask not what your Linux distro can do for you!
Ask what you can do for your Linux distro!
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
