From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1MZdw1-0005BD-I6 for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:53:38 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MZdvz-00059q-9j for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:53:35 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MZdvu-00055G-C3 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:53:34 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43140 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MZdvt-000557-NR for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:53:30 -0400 Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:62835) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MZdvt-00023R-7I for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:53:29 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO smtprelay2.cesmail.net) ([192.168.1.112]) by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 08 Aug 2009 00:53:28 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.22] (static-72-92-88-10.phlapa.fios.verizon.net [72.92.88.10]) by smtprelay2.cesmail.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D84FD34C6D; Sat, 8 Aug 2009 01:06:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Pavel Roskin To: Robert Millan In-Reply-To: <20090807134614.GA8719@thorin> References: <20090807134614.GA8719@thorin> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:53:25 -0400 Message-Id: <1249707205.28996.5.camel@mj> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3 (2.26.3-1.fc11) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. Cc: grub-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: Solving the grub-pe2elf problem X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 04:53:35 -0000 On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 15:46 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > Other maintainers, is it burdensome to any of you to include these binaries > in official builds? I suppose it's not, since mingw32 packages are widely > available, but it doesn't hurt to ask :-) I would prefer not to do a binary build at this stage. Especially Windows users are at risk of messing things up if the entry barrier is lowered too much. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin