From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1IRmHv-0000TP-EO for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Sep 2007 06:02:39 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IRmHu-0000TJ-0u for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Sep 2007 06:02:38 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IRmHr-0000Sa-7i for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Sep 2007 06:02:36 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IRmHr-0000SX-0c for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Sep 2007 06:02:35 -0400 Received: from ns39764.ovh.net ([91.121.25.85] helo=kotoba.storever.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IRmHq-000312-HM for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Sep 2007 06:02:34 -0400 Received: from [10.8.0.46] (unknown [10.8.0.46]) by kotoba.storever.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA4D73EBA9; Sun, 2 Sep 2007 12:03:07 +0200 (CEST) From: "Yoshinori K. Okuji" Organization: enbug.org To: Robert Millan Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 12:02:10 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.4 References: <20070831144219.GA27818@thorin> <20070831144714.GB28075@thorin> In-Reply-To: <20070831144714.GB28075@thorin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200709021202.11339.okuji@enbug.org> X-Detected-Kernel: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Cc: grub-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: buggy BIOSes (Re: pretty colors in gfxterm) 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: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 10:02:38 -0000 On Friday 31 August 2007 16:47, Robert Millan wrote: > > Besides that, it is really necessary to check what workarounds for buggy > > BIOSes are missing in GRUB 2. The current bootstrap code on PC is based > > on somewhere around GRUB 0.96, so it is a bit outdated. > > I just had a look. Is there something other than: I also looked at the ChangeLog, and found nothing else. So can we assume that all workarounds have been applied to GRUB 2 as well? Thanks, Okuji