Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: GNU GRUB 1.99 Released; So Close To Version 2.0

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,413

    Default GNU GRUB 1.99 Released; So Close To Version 2.0

    Phoronix: GNU GRUB 1.99 Released; So Close To Version 2.0

    While a number of Linux distributions are already shipping "GRUB2", version 2.0 of the GRUB boot-loader has in fact not been officially released. The proper GNU GRUB 2.0 release though is slowly nearing and yesterday marked the release of GRUB 1.99...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTQ0OA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    419

    Default

    That's great.

    But what work is left in order to get to the first 'stable' release?

    I mean when can we expect GRUB 2.0 actually being released as production ready?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    130

    Default USB

    A very important part of Grub2 is the ability to read and boot off USB. This allows Coreboot and old computers whose BIOSes can't read USBs to boot.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stan View Post
    A very important part of Grub2 is the ability to read and boot off USB. This allows Coreboot and old computers whose BIOSes can't read USBs to boot.
    That should be pretty easy to add that support to boot not just off USB's but CDROM's too as many old machines don't have CDROM boot support implemented in BIOS

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    416

    Default

    The next release will probably be 1.999, then 1.9999. Grub 2 has been in development for longer than I've been using Linux.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pvtcupcakes View Post
    The next release will probably be 1.999, then 1.9999. Grub 2 has been in development for longer than I've been using Linux.
    Or it could be 1.100. The period could be a separator rather than a decimal point, so what we think are the integer and mantissa need not have such a relationship.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    394

    Default

    what grub needs is an auto reinstall , even if windows cd over writes it. The only way to get rid of it should be deleting the linux partition.

    also by the amount of support threads i've seen sometimes it either installs wrong or fails to install...

    things like this are unacceptable at this point in time.

    a new user installs linux and the first thing he gets is a grub error as a welcome screen...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    790

    Default

    No, what grub needs is standards compliance. That means not using the area between MBR and the start of the first partition in the absence of an open standard which regulates the coexistence of several pieces of software residing in that area. And maybe degrade gracefully to chainloading the active partition if the stage1.5/core.img cannot be found.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    It would be nice if Coreboot were to have KMS, boot straight into GRUB. Then have make GRUB use SVG and mouse. This is something that looks like what Apple has got when you have a multi-boot:
    -Turn on Apple computer;
    -Gray screen with that Firefox/Website load circle animation;
    -Large Windows button and Mac OS button;
    -Clickity;
    -Boot.

    That would be soooo much nicer to look at, instead of a DOS aera boot screen. Who still has a monitor that can't at least do 24bit colour (or compatible) above 800*600? C'mon!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    192

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    It would be nice if Coreboot were to have KMS, boot straight into GRUB. Then have make GRUB use SVG and mouse. This is something that looks like what Apple has got when you have a multi-boot:
    -Turn on Apple computer;
    -Gray screen with that Firefox/Website load circle animation;
    -Large Windows button and Mac OS button;
    -Clickity;
    -Boot.

    That would be soooo much nicer to look at, instead of a DOS aera boot screen. Who still has a monitor that can't at least do 24bit colour (or compatible) above 800*600? C'mon!
    And for god's sake we need a full Emacs editor for editing the boot line.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •