Re: [PATCH] Split of normal mode (version 2)

2009-04-03 Thread Bean
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4:12 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: > On Saturday 04 April 2009 04:49:36 Bean wrote: >> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: >> > On Tuesday 31 March 2009 02:41:14 Bean wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> This new patch make some changes based on the discussion

Re: Grub2 svn2059

2009-04-03 Thread BandiPat
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: On Saturday 04 April 2009 04:02:18 BandiPat wrote: Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: On Friday 03 April 2009 14:17:04 step21 wrote: Hey, just a wild guess, but I think boot.mod got dropped and the boot command is now included in minicmd.mod Yes, it seems so. And, it is a mis

New linux loader doesn't like vga=1

2009-04-03 Thread Pavel Roskin
Hello! One of my test systems uses "vga=1" on the command line, which enables 80x50 text mode. After updating GRUB, I don't have that option anymore. I'm using text mode GRUB, and I would prefer not to be forced to use gfxterm. If I add vga=1 to the kernel command line, I get: Unable to initial

Re: [PATCH] Split of normal mode (version 2)

2009-04-03 Thread Colin D Bennett
On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 00:19:46 +0200 phcoder wrote: > > setjmp is required for the switch between rescue mode and normal mode. > > It isn't. You can just call the corresponding function. What's wrong > with such approach? So you could have something like - void grub_main () { //.

Re: r2010

2009-04-03 Thread phcoder
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: On Saturday 04 April 2009 04:56:14 Bean wrote: On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:43 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: At r2010, Bean added fake_bios_data, and this function calls grub_printf. Why not grub_dprintf? Was there any reason to print a message on the screen? Hi, Well,

Re: [PATCH] Split of normal mode (version 2)

2009-04-03 Thread phcoder
We can just put them in the normal.mod. What is wrong? Frankly, your argument reminds me of the old discussion about monolithic vs. micro kernels... Yes, it's quite similar and IMO it's better to have more small modules. It also forces to code in an abstratc way which simplifies the maintaining s

Re: r2010

2009-04-03 Thread Yoshinori K. Okuji
On Saturday 04 April 2009 04:56:14 Bean wrote: > On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:43 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: > > At r2010, Bean added fake_bios_data, and this function calls grub_printf. > > Why not grub_dprintf? Was there any reason to print a message on the > > screen? > > Hi, > > Well, I'm actual

Re: [PATCH] Split of normal mode (version 2)

2009-04-03 Thread Yoshinori K. Okuji
On Saturday 04 April 2009 04:49:36 Bean wrote: > On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: > > On Tuesday 31 March 2009 02:41:14 Bean wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> This new patch make some changes based on the discussion of previous > >> patch. > >> > >> 1, Move script engine to script

Re: r2010

2009-04-03 Thread Bean
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:43 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: > At r2010, Bean added fake_bios_data, and this function calls grub_printf. Why > not grub_dprintf? Was there any reason to print a message on the screen? Hi, Well, I'm actually planning to move fake_bios_data to a separate module loadbio

Re: [PATCH] Split of normal mode (version 2)

2009-04-03 Thread Bean
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: > On Tuesday 31 March 2009 02:41:14 Bean wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This new patch make some changes based on the discussion of previous patch. >> >> 1, Move script engine to script/sh (sh.mod) >> 2, Move generic menu code to menu (menu.mod) >> 3,

r2010

2009-04-03 Thread Yoshinori K. Okuji
At r2010, Bean added fake_bios_data, and this function calls grub_printf. Why not grub_dprintf? Was there any reason to print a message on the screen? Regards, Okuji ___ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/

Re: Grub2 svn2059

2009-04-03 Thread Yoshinori K. Okuji
On Saturday 04 April 2009 04:02:18 BandiPat wrote: > Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: > > On Friday 03 April 2009 14:17:04 step21 wrote: > >> Hey, just a wild guess, but I think boot.mod got dropped and the boot > >> command is now included in minicmd.mod > > > > Yes, it seems so. And, it is a mistake tha

Re: Grub2 svn2059

2009-04-03 Thread BandiPat
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote: On Friday 03 April 2009 14:17:04 step21 wrote: Hey, just a wild guess, but I think boot.mod got dropped and the boot command is now included in minicmd.mod Yes, it seems so. And, it is a mistake that boot and some other commands are not built into the kernel. We must

Re: Grub2 svn2059

2009-04-03 Thread Yoshinori K. Okuji
On Friday 03 April 2009 14:17:04 step21 wrote: > Hey, just a wild guess, but I think boot.mod got dropped and the boot > command is now included in minicmd.mod Yes, it seems so. And, it is a mistake that boot and some other commands are not built into the kernel. We must reduce modules, and let t

Re: [PATCH] Split of normal mode (version 2)

2009-04-03 Thread Yoshinori K. Okuji
On Tuesday 31 March 2009 02:41:14 Bean wrote: > Hi, > > This new patch make some changes based on the discussion of previous patch. > > 1, Move script engine to script/sh (sh.mod) > 2, Move generic menu code to menu (menu.mod) > 3, Move text menu viewer to menu/text (textmenu.mod) > 4, Move misc fu

Re: [BUGFIX]

2009-04-03 Thread Pavel Roskin
On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 16:48 +0200, phcoder wrote: > rgrep revealed no use for the second kernel_elf_HEADERS, so I propose to > remove it altogether > Is everybody comfortable with this patch? If I hear no oppositions in > couple of days I'll commit it. No objections. By the way, the same proble

Re: [BUGFIX]

2009-04-03 Thread phcoder
rgrep revealed no use for the second kernel_elf_HEADERS, so I propose to remove it altogether Is everybody comfortable with this patch? If I hear no oppositions in couple of days I'll commit it. phcoder wrote: Is kernel_elf_HEADERS used for anything else than symlist.c and kernel-symlist,lst ge

Re: Grub2 svn2059

2009-04-03 Thread BandiPat
step21 wrote: yes, it probably should. i know that when creating an efi image for an efi based system with grub-mkimage you specify the modules, so it gets specified there, on a bios system I'm not sure. I don't think a symlink is the right solution.Did you run autogen.sh after updating? What mig

Re: Grub2 svn2059

2009-04-03 Thread step21
yes, it probably should. i know that when creating an efi image for an efi based system with grub-mkimage you specify the modules, so it gets specified there, on a bios system I'm not sure. I don't think a symlink is the right solution.Did you run autogen.sh after updating? What might also work is

Re: Grub2 svn2059

2009-04-03 Thread BandiPat
step21 wrote: Hey, just a wild guess, but I think boot.mod got dropped and the boot command is now included in minicmd.mod So maybe your build script needs to be adjusted for that, to copy that one to the right place? Not familiar with grub2 booting on i386/bios though anymore, so just a guess.

Re: Raid 5 on raw disk install is broken.

2009-04-03 Thread Felix Zielcke
Am Dienstag, den 31.03.2009, 09:04 +1300 schrieb Centurion Computer Technology (2005) Ltd: Hi, > Also, can someone point me to the resources I need so I can build the > debian package out of the svn tree? just checkout `svn://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-grub/grub2/trunk' into your grub2 svn director