On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 10:06:40PM +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 02:07:08PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> >> On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 18:49 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I think we discussed before about util/biosdisk.c being a co
Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 02:07:08PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
>> On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 18:49 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I think we discussed before about util/biosdisk.c being a confusing name,
>>> but I can't find that thread. Did we agree on renaming it to
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 02:07:08PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 18:49 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think we discussed before about util/biosdisk.c being a confusing name,
> > but I can't find that thread. Did we agree on renaming it to something
> > else? I
On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 18:49 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think we discussed before about util/biosdisk.c being a confusing name,
> but I can't find that thread. Did we agree on renaming it to something
> else? If so, what to?
My preference:
util/hostdisk.c
Runners-up:
util/osdisk.c
Hi,
I think we discussed before about util/biosdisk.c being a confusing name,
but I can't find that thread. Did we agree on renaming it to something
else? If so, what to?
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your
