From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1FI5De-0007iC-It for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 09:37:22 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FI5Dc-0007i0-V2 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 09:37:20 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FI5Db-0007hh-4G for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 09:37:20 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FI5Db-0007he-1W for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 09:37:19 -0500 Received: from [194.109.24.36] (helo=smtp-vbr16.xs4all.nl) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FI5H8-0007gX-11 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 09:40:58 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (mgerards.xs4all.nl [82.92.27.129]) by smtp-vbr16.xs4all.nl (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k2BEbDB4037077 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 2006 15:37:13 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from mgerards@xs4all.nl) Mail-Copies-To: mgerards@xs4all.nl To: The development of GRUB 2 References: <44107EAC.5030300@yahoo.com> <874q26ug9b.fsf@xs4all.nl> <200603111108.23859.okuji@enbug.org> From: Marco Gerards Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 15:37:13 +0100 In-Reply-To: <200603111108.23859.okuji@enbug.org> (Yoshinori K. Okuji's message of "Sat, 11 Mar 2006 11:08:23 +0000") Message-ID: <87mzfxujxi.fsf@xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner Subject: Re: mkfs command in grub 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, 11 Mar 2006 14:37:21 -0000 "Yoshinori K. Okuji" writes: > On Friday 10 March 2006 21:44, Marco Gerards wrote: >> I think it is easy to implement this feature, and agree it might be >> useful in the cases you described. I wonder how the other developers >> think about including such feature. > > For me, this kind of feature is an OS's task rather than a boot loader's. Boot > loaders should concentrate on booting up operation systems, and the other > tasks should be left to each operation system. Making a filesystem is not > related to booting, since newly created filesystems contain no boot > information. Unfortunately the rationale behind this idea was not in the original email. The main reason for this feature request was that swap space can be shared between windows and GNU/Linux this way. So you can make a fat filesystem when booting windows and a swap filesystem when booting GNU/Linux. Although this is not something really important for us, I do see the use of such feature. -- Marco