I'm /investigating/ upgrading to grub2. As such, I've not actually installed it yet as I'm still resolving problems with doing so like this one, so can't /confirm/ the lack of file collisions, but from all I've read so far, grub2, aka grub:2 aka >=grub-1.99 renames all possibly colliding files to grub2 versions, and is slotted :2 precisely to allow installation beside grub-legacy, so there /should/ be no collisions. Further, grub:0 and grub:2 don't appear to block each other, and grub-static corresponds to grub:0, so while it should indeed block grub:0, I don't see how a full block on all grub slots, the current blocker, can be valid. The closest grub:0/grub:2 colliding bug I saw tho was back with grub-1.98, and the resolution and comments appear to indicate that there should now be no conflicts, thus this bug. (That said, if there's some valid reason for the all-slots block, feel free to close this bug. I did look but didn't see anything since the already mentioned 1.98 bug, which appeared to indicate that the collisions should be resolved now, so...)
OK, all upgraded to grub:2 now, and I can confirm that there's no file collisions between it and grub-static. FWIW I have four disks partitioned identically, with most of the system in a number of 4-way md/raid-1s. However, I have /boot as two separate two-disk raid-1s, so I can upgrade kernels and in this case grub on the one two-disk set, while leaving the other safely alone until after I've test-booted from both of the disks in the one two-disk raid-1 by itself. Once that's working to my satisfaction, I can upgrade the other one. That's why I wanted to keep grub-static around over the upgrade, since I was only playing around with the one md/raid /boot array, while grub-static remained on the other one. The only problem with the idea was the too-broad blocker grub-static has on all of grub, when it should only be against sys-boot/grub:0, aka <=sys-boot/grub-1.90, or some such (current grub:2 being 1.99-r2, with the changelog listing versions back to 1.91 in 2005, so <=1.90 should do quite nicely, or make it <1.99 if desired, since the file collisions were resolved with 1.98). grub-static's no longer on my system and I must say it's nice to be be able to build everything on my no-multilib system once again, but the security of having grub-static still installed and workable on the two drives, should the grub2 I was learning on the other two wasn't yet setup properly, was very nice to have! =:^)
The blocker indeed should be updated. PRoblem is that the ebuild also needs to be migrated to newer eapi.
should be all set now in the tree; thanks for the report! Commit message: Block grub-0.9x versions only http://sources.gentoo.org/sys-boot/grub-static/grub-static-0.96-r1.ebuild?r1=1.4&r2=1.5 http://sources.gentoo.org/sys-boot/grub-static/grub-static-0.97-r6.ebuild?r1=1.6&r2=1.7 http://sources.gentoo.org/sys-boot/grub-static/grub-static-0.97-r9.ebuild?r1=1.11&r2=1.12 http://sources.gentoo.org/sys-boot/grub-static/grub-static-0.97-r10.ebuild?r1=1.7&r2=1.8 http://sources.gentoo.org/sys-boot/grub-static/grub-static-0.97-r12.ebuild?r1=1.1&r2=1.2 http://sources.gentoo.org/sys-boot/grub-static/grub-static-0.97.ebuild?r1=1.7&r2=1.8
