From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1Hp7Kq-00028k-Rc for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 14:37:52 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hp7Kp-00028f-W4 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 14:37:52 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hp7Kn-00027p-II for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 14:37:50 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hp7Kn-00027m-BM for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 14:37:49 -0400 Received: from [212.85.152.101] (helo=kotoba.storever.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Hp7Km-0002v0-W3 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 14:37:49 -0400 Received: from kotoba.oasis.nexedi.com (kotoba.oasis.nexedi.com [212.85.152.101]) by kotoba.storever.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 819AD3D021C8C for ; Sat, 19 May 2007 00:42:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [??1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kotoba.storever.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 527F13D021C8A for ; Sat, 19 May 2007 00:42:46 +0200 (CEST) From: "Yoshinori K. Okuji" Organization: enbug.org To: The development of GRUB 2 Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 20:37:47 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.4 References: <20070106165916.GA7895@lapse.madduck.net> <20070507200050.GB3143@aragorn> <87iraruoq5.wl@dekkers.cx> In-Reply-To: <87iraruoq5.wl@dekkers.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200705182037.47682.okuji@enbug.org> X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000277, version=0.17.2 X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) Subject: Re: Bug#381150: still not able to handle partitionable arrays 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: Fri, 18 May 2007 18:37:52 -0000 On Thursday 17 May 2007 23:25, Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > I've been thinking about that too, because the current way seems a bit > fragile. But then you're looking up the device major and minor number > for partionable RAID arrays and you see that it's in the > "LOCAL/EXPERIMENTAL USE" range. Not very useful either... Hmm... Okuji