Re: grub / grub2 conflicts

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Doug Ledford <dledford@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Like I said, not true.  The grub package is designed to be updateable without requiring an mbr reinstall.  What's more is I had a look at the stage1.[hS] files in the grub shipped in FC-1 and RHEL-5, and just like I said, they are indeed binary compatible.  So even if the grub user space application pulls its MBR from a statically linked copy of the MBR, it will still work with pretty much any stage1.5 or stage2 you find in a guest.


Pretty much any? Hmm are you saying that random other linux distribution's grub  binaries are garunteed(or promised/expected) to be binary compatible?  Other distributors do have the ability to patch that 1.5 stage code in non-binary compatible ways don't they? We aren't talking strictly about the Fedora/RHEL ecosystem are we? Just because RHEL and Fedora have chosen not to include binary incompatible patches, doesn't mean its a truism across the guest OS landscape does it?

Is that binary compatibility tested for as part of operation? Is that compatibility strictly a consequence of distribution level decision making concerning Fedora and RHEL?  Is that binary compatibility guaranteed or promised from other distribution's grub1 variants being shipped?  

-jef
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux