Bug#759018: [PATCH RFC] Provide prebuilt grub-xen binaries for host (dom0) use

[Ian Campbell]

On Sat, 2014-08-30 at 20:12 +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 01:28:44AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > Is there a policy regarding using e.g. people/foo branches in the main
> > grub.git or shall I go create myself a gitorious repo for WIP stuff?
> 
> Given that it's basically me, I haven't really worried about policy, but
> I generally think people/FOO/BAR type branches are a good idea.
> 
> > I've attached a little mini series which addresses the issues you raised
> > and switches to the proposed /boot/xen naming scheme.
> > 
> > I've also added some new patches.
> 
> This all LGTM.  Please go ahead.

A fair bit of time has passed, we are now quite close to the freeze and
this series adds a new binary package (hence NEW queue etc) so rather
than committing I've pushed to the people/ijc/xen branch. Is it still OK
to go ahead?

> > The implementation is a bit
> > unsatisfactory since grub-mkimage doesn't let you change only the output
> > file without moving grubdir (AFAICT), so it generates and then moves it.
> 
> Seems surprising.  Can't you use the -o option?  I don't think that does
> anything to grubdir.  Or failing that the default is to output the image
> to stdout, so you could just redirect.
> 
> Ah, but it looks like you're actually talking about grub-install here.
> Yeah.  Moving it after the fact isn't the end of the world, but armed
> with a Xen-blessed spec I think we should fix grub-install upstream to
> automatically DTRT here.

I've posted such a patch upstream and it's in the above branch.
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2014-10/msg00041.html

Ian.