On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 10:44:38PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Diffs to patches would be hard to read, but if you could simply add a
> cover letter with a short summary of the changes compared to previous
> versions, that’d be perfect. :-)
I think for an RFC at least it'd be best for me to st
Jookia <166...@gmail.com> skribis:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 03:48:38PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Jookia <166...@gmail.com> skribis:
>>
>> > While previously creating a GC root for GRUB's resources was the caller's
>> > responsibility, it's much less repetitive to put it in install-grub no
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 03:48:38PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Jookia <166...@gmail.com> skribis:
>
> > While previously creating a GC root for GRUB's resources was the caller's
> > responsibility, it's much less repetitive to put it in install-grub now that
> > it's wrapped by error handling.
Jookia <166...@gmail.com> skribis:
> While previously creating a GC root for GRUB's resources was the caller's
> responsibility, it's much less repetitive to put it in install-grub now that
> it's wrapped by error handling. This also means we can replace the
> install-grub*
> function with a smal
While previously creating a GC root for GRUB's resources was the caller's
responsibility, it's much less repetitive to put it in install-grub now that
it's wrapped by error handling. This also means we can replace the install-grub*
function with a small definition inside perform-action named 'insta
