| 1 |
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 04:50:15PM +0000, mcatudal@×××××××.net wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> ----- Mail original ----- |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> >It's not a bug, and it won't be "fixed". Installing on a partition is |
| 7 |
> >simply not supported. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> When a needed functionality is no longer working it is a bug. To have |
| 10 |
> grub installing itself on the MBR when the users doesn't it to is |
| 11 |
> unacceptable because it wipes out the part that loads the bootloader so |
| 12 |
> booting to other operating systems (OS/2, PC Dos, Ecomstation, etc) is |
| 13 |
> no longer possible with a nice bootloader, we are then stuck with grub |
| 14 |
> which is a pain in the ass to setup. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> I want to use grub only for the current Linux that I boot on. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> The maintainers of grub are basically acting like dictators much like |
| 19 |
> Microsoft. The whole point of using Linux was to have complete control |
| 20 |
> of the PC. Who those morons think they are to tell me what I should use |
| 21 |
> to boot Operating systems on my computer? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Just to point out that the unparliamentary language is not going to |
| 24 |
contribute towards any solution. For all we know, some of the relevant |
| 25 |
maintainers might be Gentoo users subscribed to this list, and slagging |
| 26 |
them off isn't helpful. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
There might well be good reasons for the restriction. Discovering what |
| 29 |
they are is more likely to point towards a positive resolution. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> Michel |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany). |
Archives