On 4/7/22 08:02, Jared Dominguez wrote:
> This is a proposal. Nothing has changed yet. The choice is now whether
> to go forward with it or come together with a cohesive
> alternative, including one of the two listed in the proposal. But we
> need a solution that accounts for the existing maintainers not having
> capacity to continue maintaining legacy code. I've seen responses from
I haven't yet seen a clear answer about what code is "rotting" and which
legacy code is too hard to maintain. Is there something actually broken
right now?
For one, syslinux hasn't seen an update in 3 years and a release in 7 years, and it has outstanding bugs. Legacy boot isn't where grub2 is getting development attention. The current maintainers in Fedora won't have capacity to continue maintaining legacy boot support in Fedora. As grub2 continues to be developed for UEFI systems (ARMv8-9 and x86-64, not to mention non-UEFI ppc64le and s390x), there is added risk of regressions on legacy x86 boot that won't be getting developer attention.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure