On 06.10.2013 17:56, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> В Sun, 06 Oct 2013 16:54:08 +0200
> Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko пишет:
>
>> On 26.09.2013 15:08, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>>> Hello, all. Recently I made some order in hostdisk.c and getroot.c
>>> involving splitting in
В Sun, 06 Oct 2013 16:54:08 +0200
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko пишет:
> On 26.09.2013 15:08, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> > Hello, all. Recently I made some order in hostdisk.c and getroot.c
> > involving splitting in OS-specific parts.
> > In the same time I added WinA
В Thu, 26 Sep 2013 20:49:52 +0200
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko пишет:
> On 26.09.2013 16:44, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> >> windows is low priority and more of a bonus. The problems of handling
> >> anything that looks like a list (e.g. list of devices where / resides on
> >> in case of bt
On 26.09.2013 22:51, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Sep 26, 2013, at 2:22 PM, Lennart Sorensen
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 08:49:52PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
>> Serbinenko wrote:
>>> This is interesting testcase which wasn't brought before. This would
>>> potentially involve cr
On Sep 26, 2013, at 2:22 PM, Lennart Sorensen
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 08:49:52PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
> Serbinenko wrote:
>> This is interesting testcase which wasn't brought before. This would
>> potentially involve creating several core.img or forcing UUID when using
>>
On 26.09.2013 22:22, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 08:49:52PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
> Serbinenko wrote:
>> This is interesting testcase which wasn't brought before. This would
>> potentially involve creating several core.img or forcing UUID when using
>> multiple de
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 08:49:52PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
> This is interesting testcase which wasn't brought before. This would
> potentially involve creating several core.img or forcing UUID when using
> multiple devices. Again, pretty easy in C and hairy in bash due
Quoting Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko, who wrote the following on...:
On 26.09.2013 19:10, Seth Goldberg wrote:
Ditto here. I'd prefer it stay *sh.
Even if it would mean to go with bash?
Solaris was one of the worst platforms for making grub-install work
there due to its very lim
On 09/26/13 19:51, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
On 26.09.2013 19:10, Seth Goldberg wrote:
Ditto here. I'd prefer it stay *sh.
Even if it would mean to go with bash?
Solaris was one of the worst platforms for making grub-install work
there due to its very limited shell and
On 26.09.2013 19:10, Seth Goldberg wrote:
>
> Ditto here. I'd prefer it stay *sh.
>
Even if it would mean to go with bash?
Solaris was one of the worst platforms for making grub-install work
there due to its very limited shell and standard tools behaving
differently. Frankly I wouldn't be surpr
On 26.09.2013 16:44, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
>> windows is low priority and more of a bonus. The problems of handling
>> anything that looks like a list (e.g. list of devices where / resides on
>> in case of btrfs) and code becoming hairy to handle those cases is
>> bigger reason.
>
> Sure lists c
Sounds great phcoder,
Anything that removes grubs dependency on a *nix-specific environment has
to be a good thing imho (or is it the grand *nix bootloader?)
___
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
Ditto here. I'd prefer it stay *sh.
--S
On Sep 26, 2013, at 6:35 AM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:08:54PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
> Serbinenko wrote:
>> Hello, all. Recently I made some order in hostdisk.c and getroot.c
>> involving splitting in OS-specific
> If we agree on bash as common denominator, bash has arrays which
> make this straightforward. Unless we want to continue support for bash
> 1.x.
>
This would step up the requirements. BSDs commonly have no bash
installed. AROS probably has no bash available at all.
AROS uses GRUB as its bootloa
В Thu, 26 Sep 2013 15:08:54 +0200
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko пишет:
> Hello, all. Recently I made some order in hostdisk.c and getroot.c
> involving splitting in OS-specific parts.
> In the same time I added WinAPI version of getroot/hostdisk allowing
> grub-probe to work on windows na
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:59:03PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
> What kind of changes was it? Could we make them into some (possibly
> hidden) options?
Well for quite a while the logic was assuming apple powerpc, and it
needed rework to make it work on the IBM powerpc syst
On 26.09.2013 15:35, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:08:54PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
> Serbinenko wrote:
>> Hello, all. Recently I made some order in hostdisk.c and getroot.c
>> involving splitting in OS-specific parts.
>> In the same time I added WinAPI version of g
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:08:54PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
> Hello, all. Recently I made some order in hostdisk.c and getroot.c
> involving splitting in OS-specific parts.
> In the same time I added WinAPI version of getroot/hostdisk allowing
> grub-probe to work on win
18 matches
Mail list logo
