On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 18:48 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 06:30:58PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 20:11 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > The grub package (as provided in Fedora) is not designed for that. This > > > would be a much easier discussion to have if you stopped describing > > > things that are manifestly true as "not true". And while it is the case > > > that grub *is* binary compatible between every version we've ever > > > released, it is *not* guaranteed that that remains true, or even that > > > it's true between us and any distribution that may be installed in a > > > guest. > > > > If libguestfs had code to detect that the guest version was incompatible > > and failed gracefully with a nice explanation for the user, then there's > > no problem right? > > To be reliable you'd need to support disassembling the binaries > installed and working out what the arguments are meant to look like. > This doesn't seem like a great way to spend time. Not your problem how libguestfs authors spend their time. Nor whether they actually do this or choose to just warn their users about potential incompatibility. > Remember that the incompatibility isn't between libguestfs and the > guest, it's between the host grub and the guest grub. Both of those > can change without libguestfs's knowledge. Sounds like we need a 'Conflicts: libguestfs' in both grub and grub2 then? Cheers, Mark. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
