On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 02:36:32PM +0200, Felix Zielcke wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 30.08.2008, 14:01 +0200 schrieb Robert Millan:
>
> > I think the idea with this was to unify the strings for grub_dprintf calls;
> > your patch goes a bit further and also puts other sort of strings to share
> > the s
Am Samstag, den 30.08.2008, 14:01 +0200 schrieb Robert Millan:
> I think the idea with this was to unify the strings for grub_dprintf calls;
> your patch goes a bit further and also puts other sort of strings to share
> the same variable.
>
> I think that's a bit dangerous, since changes intended
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 07:09:37PM +0200, Felix Zielcke wrote:
> @@ -248,7 +250,7 @@ grub_scsi_open (const char *name, grub_d
> {
>if (! p->open (name, scsi))
> {
> - disk->id = (unsigned long) "scsi"; /* XXX */
> + disk->id = (unsigned long) modname; /* XXX */
I thi
Am Donnerstag, den 28.08.2008, 20:31 +0200 schrieb Marco Gerards:
> Felix Zielcke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Seems like it isn't that bad to review your own patches _before_ sending
> > them and actually to compile them ..
>
> ...and include a changelog entry? ;-)
That's evolution's fault
Felix Zielcke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Seems like it isn't that bad to review your own patches _before_ sending
> them and actually to compile them ..
...and include a changelog entry? ;-)
--
Marco
___
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
Seems like it isn't that bad to review your own patches _before_ sending
them and actually to compile them ..
--
Felix Zielcke
Index: disk/lvm.c
===
--- disk/lvm.c (Revision 1831)
+++ disk/lvm.c (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -24,6 +24,8 @@
#in
