Felix Zielcke <fziel...@z-51.de> writes: > Am Freitag, den 05.06.2009, 12:00 +0200 schrieb Marco Gerards: >> Felix Zielcke <fziel...@z-51.de> writes: >> >> > Am Donnerstag, den 04.06.2009, 10:21 +0200 schrieb Marco Gerards: >> >> Felix Zielcke <fziel...@z-51.de> writes: >> >> >> >> > Am Montag, den 01.06.2009, 16:24 +0200 schrieb Vladimir 'phcoder' >> >> > Serbinenko: >> >> >> However convention for >> >> >> creating false is: >> >> >> return grub_error (GRUB_ERR_TEST_FAILURE, "false"); >> >> >> and not >> >> >> return 1; >> >> > >> >> > Ok changed it. If everyone is fine with placing this in normal/main.c, I >> >> > commit it. >> >> >> >> Unless it is essential to do so, please do not place it in >> >> normal/main.c. >> > >> > would normal/misc.c be okay or maybe a new file normal/true.c? >> > I just don't think it's worth to create a new module for these 2 very >> > little commands. >> >> The problem is with too many little commands, the size of normal.mod >> grows. Although the commands are *very* small and I do not strongly >> object to inclusion in normal.mod, if noone else has any objection. > > The binary size of normal.mod would grow about 264 bytes whereas in > minicmd.mod it would be just 260 bytes. > But I already forgot that Bean wants to get rid of normal.mod. > > So what should I do now? > Placing it in normal.mod or minicmd.mod where it's included in rescue > mode or placing it into a true.mod where the size increase would be > bigger?
minicmd.mod is not a very descriptive name. Better call is truefalse.mod or something like that. -- Marco _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
