grub / grub2 conflicts
pjones at redhat.com
Thu Sep 15 15:28:20 UTC 2011
On 09/15/2011 11:16 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:46:34AM -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
>> On 09/15/2011 10:27 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>> So I propose that we drop this conflicts and fix grubby instead.
>> We certainly can't do that without at least first fixing other problems.
> Could you explain (preferably with a full list of bugs) what you were
> trying to solve with the conflicts line in the spec file? The only
> bugs I've seen so far describe problems in grubby, and this appears to
> be a workaround for them. However it may be I don't have the full
You're correct that this initially was added to work around a problem in
grubby, and I fully intend to further investigate that, as I said above. But
the fact remains that having multiple bootloaders installed, especially with
such similarly named tools, is a *bad idea*.
>>> However the maintainer of grub is unwilling to do this, which is why
>>> I've escalated this issue here.
>> I've been asking you to explain why you need this and you stopped
>> participating in the conversation and started this thread instead.
> Since you starting swearing at me on IRC, I thought it better that we
> discuss this in technical terms, and mailing lists are in any case a
> better forum for technical discussions than chat.
Nice try - but the (somewhat reasonable) swearing was *after* you decided
to stop participating in the conversation and decided to move the discussion
elsewhere instead of helping to find the best way to solve the problem.
In no way is walking away from an ongoing conversation with relevant other
people who are trying to help you an appropriate response. At best it's just
rude. That's why after you did that, I said that you were being an asshole.
I apologize if my language offended you; I was frustrated that you began
behaving in an uncooperative manor when Matthew and I were trying to analyze
the full scale of the problem and find possible solutions to it. I should
have behaved more excellently towards you, even after you refused to answer
More information about the devel