Committed.
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 04:50:17PM +0200, Marco Gerards wrote:
> Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 07:52:59PM +0200, Marco Gerards wrote:
> >> > #include
> >> > #include
> >> > +#include /* For struct grub_mmap_entry, which is
> >> > als
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 07:52:59PM +0200, Marco Gerards wrote:
>> > #include
>> > #include
>> > +#include/* For struct grub_mmap_entry, which is
>> > also
>> > + needed by Multiboot. */
>>
>> Isn't it better to
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 07:52:59PM +0200, Marco Gerards wrote:
> > #include
> > #include
> > +#include /* For struct grub_mmap_entry, which is
> > also
> > + needed by Multiboot. */
>
> Isn't it better to split the header file? This seems like a hack.
T
Hi,
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And here we go *AGAIN*, this time not forgetting to include all files in the
> patch.
[...]
> Index: include/grub/i386/pc/init.h
> ===
> --- include/grub/i386/pc/init.h (revisio
And here we go *AGAIN*, this time not forgetting to include all files in the
patch.
--
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
And here's a new one, using NESTED_FUNC_ATTR to prevent %ecx being trashed
as Bean pointed out on IRC.
--
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 re
My last commit just broke my own patch (sigh).
Here's an updated version.
--
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 acces
