From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1PYNC0-0002Bl-CG for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Dec 2010 13:25:40 -0500 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=35416 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PYNBw-0002BB-Ja for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Dec 2010 13:25:38 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PYNBv-0005Wt-0v for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Dec 2010 13:25:36 -0500 Received: from mail-bw0-f41.google.com ([209.85.214.41]:44268) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PYNBu-0005Wi-PS for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Dec 2010 13:25:34 -0500 Received: by bwz16 with SMTP id 16so14545551bwz.0 for ; Thu, 30 Dec 2010 10:25:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=y6aaCKHATLB7ivB6ENsEfDDLOHHSDyfKcooN9LvpWt8=; b=KFeX1gSYMnJs4DR4dTM+anJL/+T/jiSqqUtfKAGN4OQiW1lChJtE2oTRuyDh1MSod4 o3oXxqWOS5Z0f5dr26L0JwxymwVSRNbfr+XEwjOh7yQ2/mK+55TPAY+A6WMJMYTYmCiK 7u+5cHtyn44lRPn5cbQAZUurCv4VOr0HuFjew= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=I3Wvf57roag1tnLLAPF8aveiAGUwLIp9aW3Ua6upxyT2j3NKZP3y3VUK22EbyP9fB/ cbiQ67zzp/6gUwXSMQFWueYSRKz8NqrNfwmbgC8bh6GfJV3TcFMEDatM7W7EvS+cn3b8 ORRpow+0gj9F6i0+YW3YMWWb3dGM8DttQgiIg= Received: by 10.204.72.199 with SMTP id n7mr6373613bkj.8.1293733532272; Thu, 30 Dec 2010 10:25:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from lmo.localnet (pc1-79.jsn.osi.pl [84.205.185.79]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v1sm9358490bkt.5.2010.12.30.10.25.30 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 30 Dec 2010 10:25:31 -0800 (PST) From: =?utf-8?q?=C5=81ukasz_Ole=C5=9B?= To: Colin Watson Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 19:25:06 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.32-5-686; KDE/4.4.5; i686; ; ) References: <4D025316.4090300@debian.org> <1292150936.3881.15.camel@s710.lan> <20101219114715.GZ12396@riva.ucam.org> In-Reply-To: <20101219114715.GZ12396@riva.ucam.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <201012301925.07473.lukaszoles@gmail.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) Cc: Thomas Schmidt , 606719@bugs.debian.org, debian-release@lists.debian.org, grub-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: Bug#606719: "Normal" kernel being before the Xen hypervisor in Squeeze X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GNU GRUB List-Id: The development of GNU GRUB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 18:25:38 -0000 Hello, On Sunday 19 December 2010 12:47:15 Colin Watson wrote: > On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 11:48:56AM +0100, Thomas Schmidt wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 12.12.2010, 14:18 +0800 schrieb Thomas Goirand: > > > For me, it's a grave regression that can put a production environment > > > into big troubles, and it would deserved a RC for me, but because: > > > - of Julien's opinion > > > - that the RT should have the final word > > > - that I respect this view > > > - that delaying Squeeze just for this might not be a good idea > > > - not everyone really cares much about Xen in Debian > > >=20 > > > ... then I sent my report as a wishlist as requested. > >=20 > > I also agree that this needs to be resolved before the release and in my > > opinion this bugs severity should be at least important, if not critical > > because it will "break" Xen dom0 functionality of existing systems when > > they are upgraded from Lenny to Squeeze. > >=20 > > Of course this could be "fixed" by the user of the package by selecting > > an appropriate GRUB_DEFAULT value, but this is likely to break if new > > kernel versions are installed. > >=20 > > The appropriate fix is very simple, just rename /etc/grub.d/20_linux_xen > > to /etc/grub.d/09_linux_xen or some other number in the range of 06-09. >=20 > I'd prefer this to be decided upstream. What do people on grub-devel > think? It does make some sense that the default should be to use Xen if > it's present, IMO. >=20 > (See http://bugs.debian.org/606719 for the full history of this bug.) Any update on this? I have also run into this issue Regards, =2D- =C5=81ukasz Ole=C5=9B