On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 01:26:50PM +0800, Bean wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch moves the screen init code from reader to menu, so that
> hidemenu would work as before. A minor side effect is that if grub.cfg
> is not found, the "GNU GRUB" header would not be printed, but I guess
> this is not an issue.
Hi Bean,
I don't understand this very well. First of all, which part is supposed
to be responsible for printing the header? Are you changing that? Right
now it is being printed twice.
> -static grub_err_t
> -grub_rescue_init (void)
> -{
> - grub_printf ("Entering rescue mode...\n");
> - return 0;
> -}
> -
> /* Prompt to input a command and read the line. */
> static grub_err_t
> grub_rescue_read_line (char **line, int cont)
> @@ -77,7 +70,6 @@ grub_rescue_read_line (char **line, int cont)
> static struct grub_reader grub_rescue_reader =
> {
> .name = "rescue",
> - .init = grub_rescue_init,
> .read_line = grub_rescue_read_line
> };
Why is grub_rescue_init being removed?
> @@ -524,7 +517,6 @@ grub_normal_read_line (char **line, int cont)
> static struct grub_reader grub_normal_reader =
> {
> .name = "normal",
> - .init = grub_normal_reader_init,
> .read_line = grub_normal_read_line
> };
And this one, too. If readers are no longer responsible for printing a
header, shouldn't we adjust whatever code that was calling their
init functions, and the grub_reader struct as well?
This patch looks like a kludge to me. Can we discuss what's wrong with the
current design, and what options do we have to solve this?
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."
_______________________________________________
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
