On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Robert Millan<r...@aybabtu.com> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 04:37:40PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: >> > I agree with this. But please wait a few days to give everyone a chance >> > to read it. >> > >> > Regarding the patch: >> > >> > There's a much simpler way to address this. Just add something like: >> > >> > cmdline_argv = argv + 1; >> > cmdline_argc = argc - 1; >> > >> > at the beginning, and then use cmdline_argv and cmdline_argc instead of >> > correcting the off-by-one every time. >> Correcting the numbers is actually smaller part of the patch. The most >> of it is to make empty commandlines to be handled correctly (this >> couldn't happen previously) > > Either there's an extra argv member that is always present and we want > to remove, or there's the possibility that the command-line is empty. > AFAICS we can't have both problems. > No. Now we have an extra element that is always present and we want to remove but when we remove command line can be empty and code must handle it correctly.
> argv[0] corresponds to the filename, right? In that case, it's not possible > to run multiboot without argv[0] (or at least, we shouldn't allow it). Then > we can remove it unconditionally. > > -- > 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 > -- Regards Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko Personal git repository: http://repo.or.cz/w/grub2/phcoder.git _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
