Re: Next release?

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 04:48:33PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-07-19 at 22:16 +0200, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> 
> > I am totally against ripping off device.map. Pavel's idea is too
> > idealistic, 
> > and that regresses the flexibility.
> 
> Actually, it could be said that having device.map regresses flexibility.
> Suppose I want to install GRUB on a flash drive that is seen
> as /dev/sdb.  I need to add /dev/sdb to device.map even though I'm not
> going to see that flash drive again.  I also need to check the options
> to ensure that everything is installed on the flash drive and nothing is
> installed elsewhere.
> 
> Suppose that we don't have device.map.  Then I don't need to add entries
> for temporary devices.  Also, I won't be able to create a cross-drive
> configuration by accident, simple because it won't be allowed by
> default.

But we could have device.map _and_ a fallback mechanism for when there's
no match (e.g. give it a "(dummy0)" drive).

I even STR I implemented that in some patch.

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What good is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)