Bravo On Wed, 2005-13-04 at 10:46 -0700, Mike Bird wrote: > On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 05:28, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > If you have other SPECIFIC issues with the currently aviable grub > > package in rawhide, raise them and they will be evaluated case-by-case. > > In the real world, a history of unreliability is a SPECIFIC issue. It's > the SPECIFIC issue that gets Windows servers replaced by Linux servers. > > Peter in his cubicle may believe that Grub is now perfect. Even if he's > right it's irrelevant at this time because nobody (except unwitting > Redhat shareholders) is going to bet the farm on a new version of a > product with a history of unreliability and missing features. > > A year from now, if Peter's dreams are realized, would be the time to > consider removing Lilo. Or maybe that would be the time to start > replacing Grub Legacy with Grub2. > > FC4t2 Grub includes a Dec'04 MD patch, a Jan'05 MD patch, a Feb'05 MD > patch, and a Mar'05 MD patch. We all hope that no more patches will be > needed for MD in Grub, but is it realistic to bet the Redhat farm on it > today? > > I'm certainly not going to bet our clients' data on Grub until I see how > reliable Grub is now and also whether the next few updates are reliable > too. > > A HISTORY of reliability is essential for any mission critical package. > A proven history over multiple upgrades is particularly important for > Grub which uses a fragile shell/awk/sed script to parse mdadm output > instead of copying the simple GET_ARRAY_INFO ioctl used by Lilo. > > The appropriate course is for Peter to restore Lilo, apologize on behalf > of Redhat for taking five years to add MD support to Grub, state that > Grub is now believed to support MD under such-and-such SPECIFIC > conditions, and ask us to give Grub another try. > > --Mike Bird > > -- Guy Fraser Network Administrator The Internet Centre 1-888-450-6787 (780)450-6787