"Yoshinori K. Okuji" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sunday 30 October 2005 10:04 pm, Marco Gerards wrote: >> > I really don't like that each command has to explicitly set RESULT. As >> > you note, it would be better if the return code from the command were >> > automatically placed into the status environment variable. >> >> Most command return grub_err_t. The only commands that matter for us >> are commands like `['. Would you propose every commands returns an >> int and that on function return grub_errno is checked? > > I agree with Hollis. It should be automatic. What is wrong with setting $? to > grub_errno? Isn't it enough to see if it is GRUB_ERR_NONE or not?
Perhaps there is no problem with that. I just assumed it should be an int. I will make this change. > BTW, you added lsb.c, but I don't like this very much. On Unix, the testing > command is "test", and "[" is just an aliases, isn't it? I prefer to use > commands/test.c, and register "[" as another name of test. You are right. I am not that familiar with shell scripting, so there might be more stupid mistakes you could all catch. Please tell me about them. Thanks, Marco _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
