[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GRUB plans...

From: Thierry Laronde
Subject: Re: GRUB plans...
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 14:01:55 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

On Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 05:54:10PM -0700, address@hidden wrote:
> Essentially, what I'm after is:
>   --  Multiplatform:  Bootloaders on other arch's sometimes suck
>       more than x86.  ;-)  Or they're just inflexible.
>       This would entail some modularization and testing, but I think
>       it's probably not all that hard to port the filesystem code, for
>       example.  We'd have to write some partition code that other
>       hardware expects to see, but that's not a big deal.
>       Then there are the hardware-dependent bits to write, of course.

May I suggest to reorganise, before modifying the code, the tree and
names of sources? When I worked on adding the CD and extended floppy
formats I was a bit puzzled by the names (stage1 loads start.S which
passes control to asm.S which calls common.c which transfers to main in
stage2.c ...) and by the organization (architecture dependent code has
to be put in a separate directory ; the GRUB versions of some of the
functions commonly found in libc should be put in a separate directory
too, etc...). 

Another thing that would be great is to code with cweb [is there a web
implementation for assembly?]. I --- badly --- mimic a web style for
stage1.S putting lots of comments, but the interaction between the
different pieces of code would be greatly emphasized by literate
programming --- probably one of the best ideas of Don Knuth.

Just my humble opinion.

Thierry Laronde (Alceste) <address@hidden>
Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89  250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]