That sounds reasonable. So perhaps having a multiboot directory as Marco specified is the best way to go then. Let me know if this is an a way everyone agrees on and I'll get a patch together to make things nice for everyone.
On 8/7/07, Yoshinori K. Okuji <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > On Thursday 26 July 2007 00:28, Jerone Young wrote: > > This was no mistake. So here is the thinking here (I figured this > > would come up). The multiboot heads outside of the grub directory are > > not grub specific. This gives other operating systems or programs (in > > this case GPL 3 compatible operating systems) the ability to include > > these headers and use them. They mainly contain definitions that are > > not just specific to grub, but multiboot. > > First of all, thank you for the great contribution! I guess I really must > finish writing up the specification now... > > About the headers, I don't like the location, either. As I said before, the > purpose of GRUB is not to provide a library. Even if code can be reused, this > is out of our concern. And, more importantly, the reason why the header files > are put under grub/ is to avoid conflicts with system headers. Although the > probablity of having such a conflict on multiboot.h, I still prefer to > segregate our own headers under grub. > > Thanks, > Okuji > > > _______________________________________________ > Grub-devel mailing list > Grub-devel@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel > _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
