From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Rzyfa-0007Dg-2R for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 22:58:50 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CB372E1B0B; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 22:58:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F47FE1B01 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 22:58:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 707161B403A for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 22:58:11 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.877 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.877 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.034, BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5J0v5S42L_So for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 22:58:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 387081B4042 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 22:58:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Rzyek-0006Ny-HV for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 23:57:58 +0100 Received: from athedsl-344211.home.otenet.gr ([85.72.200.49]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 23:57:58 +0100 Received: from realnc by athedsl-344211.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 23:57:58 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Nikos Chantziaras Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: About gcc-4.6 unmasking Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 00:57:40 +0200 Organization: Lucas Barks Message-ID: References: <1329770054.21166.12.camel@belkin4> <20120220190313.57892cfa@gentoo.org> <4F42F0AA.50004@gentoo.org> <20120220200220.3a54d88a@gentoo.org> <1329816398.2868.1.camel@belkin4> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-344211.home.otenet.gr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120213 Thunderbird/10.0.1 In-Reply-To: X-Archives-Salt: cde74b14-9296-4d3c-b6df-dad0c9393622 X-Archives-Hash: e8ed93bd9da28f952a3b1059a0a88092 On 22/02/12 00:38, Alec Warner wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: >> As looks like fixing old grub is far away because nobody know what is >> causing that issues, probably trying to get grub-1.99 ready for >> stabilization would be interesting (we will need to do that sooner or >> later anyway) > > Ubuntu has used grub2 for 3 years, I am considering working on making > it stable for at least x86 / amd64. That's good news. I think Gentoo has a policy on not providing unmaintained software in the tree (they're getting tree cleaned.) Given that Grub 1 is both beta software (it got stuck at 0.97, never made it to 1.0) and unmaintained, stabilizing Grub 2 ASAP is the sanest thing you can do, since even though it's also beta software, it's at least maintained by upstream.