Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-06-07 Thread Pavel Roskin
On Sun, 2009-06-07 at 11:10 +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: > On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Pavel Roskin wrote: > >> Improving > >> strcasecmp is possible and may even be compact. Even if unicode counts > >> a lot of alphabets only few are bicameral. AFAIK main ones are Latin, > >> G

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-06-07 Thread Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Pavel Roskin wrote: >>  Improving >> strcasecmp is possible and may even be compact. Even if unicode counts >> a lot of alphabets only few are bicameral. AFAIK main ones are Latin, >> Greek, Cyrillic and Armenian. I hope that in most cases the lowercase >> conversion

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-06-06 Thread Pavel Roskin
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 21:46 +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Michael Scherer wrote: > > > >> > >> We may need to use a comparison table as in hfs.c, as least for the > >> first 256 Unicode characters, but it's a separate issue. > > > > That a little bit

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-06-05 Thread Pavel Roskin
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 21:23 +0200, Michael Scherer wrote: > Ok, I have taken in account your remark. Here is another patch. I've applied your patch with two fixes. Somehow you interchanged the values of GRUB_HFSPLUSX_BINARYCOMPARE and GRUB_HFSPLUSX_CASEFOLDING. GRUB_HFSPLUSX_BINARYCOMPARE is 0xB

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-06-05 Thread Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Michael Scherer wrote: > >> >> We may need to use a comparison table as in hfs.c, as least for the >> first 256 Unicode characters, but it's a separate issue. > > That a little bit too complex for me, I have just patched grub for the > simplest case, and for the issu

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-06-05 Thread Michael Scherer
Le mercredi 03 juin 2009 à 17:23 -0400, Pavel Roskin a écrit : > Hello! > > I think the ChangeLog needs to be improved. It's immodest to claim > "complete" support for something. It's a very strong statement. It's > better to say "improve". Or better yet, let's be specific. Also please > spel

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-06-03 Thread Pavel Roskin
Hello! I think the ChangeLog needs to be improved. It's immodest to claim "complete" support for something. It's a very strong statement. It's better to say "improve". Or better yet, let's be specific. Also please spell check the entry. "insensitive" and "insentive" is not the same. You want

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-06-03 Thread Michael Scherer
Le mercredi 03 juin 2009 à 11:26 +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko a écrit : > I see a two last problems with your patch: > + grub_uint32_t clump_size; // ignored > We use /* Ignored. */ style of comments > @@ -3106,7 +3112,6 @@ > (freetype_libs): Likewise. > > * util/grub-mk

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-06-03 Thread Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
> Well, thanks for taking time to review :) You're welcome > > Just for my own curiosity, isn't the inlining of function automatic with > gcc and recent compiler ? It is. However if you want to be sure better to say it explicitely > >> @@ -218,6 +228,7 @@ struct grub_hfsplus_data >>/* This is t

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-06-03 Thread Michael Scherer
Le lundi 01 juin 2009 à 12:11 +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko a écrit : > On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Michael Scherer wrote: > > > > Le 7 févr. 09 à 22:02, Robert Millan a écrit : > > > >> On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 10:52:48PM +0100, Michael Scherer wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Here is

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-06-01 Thread Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Michael Scherer wrote: > > Le 7 févr. 09 à 22:02, Robert Millan a écrit : > >> On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 10:52:48PM +0100, Michael Scherer wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Here is the second patch, for hfsx support. This patch replace the >>> precedent. >>> >>> It is slight

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-05-03 Thread Michael Scherer
Le 7 févr. 09 à 22:02, Robert Millan a écrit : On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 10:52:48PM +0100, Michael Scherer wrote: Hi, Here is the second patch, for hfsx support. This patch replace the precedent. It is slightly more complex, and I didn't tested it on hfsx as I do not have a proper partition. B

Re: [PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-02-07 Thread Robert Millan
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 10:52:48PM +0100, Michael Scherer wrote: > Hi, > > Here is the second patch, for hfsx support. This patch replace the > precedent. > > It is slightly more complex, and I didn't tested it on hfsx as I do > not have a proper partition. > But so far, it detect correctly c

[PATCH] support of hfsx ( case comparaison )

2009-01-12 Thread Michael Scherer
Hi, Here is the second patch, for hfsx support. This patch replace the precedent. It is slightly more complex, and I didn't tested it on hfsx as I do not have a proper partition. But so far, it detect correctly config file on hfsplus. -- Michael Scherer grub.hfsx.support.diff Descripti