Commited
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko <
phco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Warning fixed in the patch. If nobody objects I commit it tomorrow
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 10:40 AM, John Stanley wrote:
>
>> The way it looks to me is that preboot_func is the function to
Warning fixed in the patch. If nobody objects I commit it tomorrow
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 10:40 AM, John Stanley wrote:
> The way it looks to me is that preboot_func is the function to be executed
> a preboot time, whereas preboot_rest_func is a cleanup function to be
> called to "restore" thin
The way it looks to me is that preboot_func is the function to be
executed a preboot time, whereas preboot_rest_func is a cleanup
function to be called to "restore" things to the pre-preboot_func state.
Something like this anyway.. its not yet real clear to me either.
phcoder wrote:
Yoshinor
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
- I don't understand how preboot_func and preboot_rest_func are different. At
least, not obvious. Can you elaborate on them?
preboot_rest_func is a function which should undo any action taken by
preboot_func. It's used if either loader aborts due to an error or
return
On Monday 13 April 2009 02:19:07 phcoder wrote:
> What about this one?
- ChangeLog, loader.h and loader.c are not consistent. For example, loader.h
declares grub_loader_unregister_preboot_hook, but loader.c defines
grub_loader_remove_preboot.
- I don't understand how preboot_func and preboot_re
What about this one?
phcoder wrote:
- Using an int value for the priority is quetionable. Very often, this
style of priority system leads to chaos, because everyone picks up
arbitrary numbers randomly. I prefer to define enums with a careful
analysis.
I will think about it. But the analysis is
- Using an int value for the priority is quetionable. Very often, this style
of priority system leads to chaos, because everyone picks up arbitrary
numbers randomly. I prefer to define enums with a careful analysis.
I will think about it. But the analysis is difficult because we don't
know in ad
On Saturday 11 April 2009 08:48:07 phcoder wrote:
> Hello, here is the preboot hooks support. Apply on top of my bootmove
> patch. They are very useful for patches like sendkey (my old patch that
> I'll rediff), badram, acpi (2 patches in separate threads) or drivemap
Some comments about the desig
