[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff
From: |
Yoshinori Okuji |
Subject: |
Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff |
Date: |
Thu, 4 Sep 2003 20:37:41 +0100 (BST) |
--- Robert Millan <address@hidden> wrote:
> Is there a generic answer for these questions when applied to adding a new
> filesystem?
Adding a new filesystem must be conservative as well.
Normally, I don't object to adding a new filesystem, but we must test it
thouroughly before adding it. The most important thing is a mount function. In
fact, there was a problem that the mount function in XFS used a opcode
supported only in recent processors, so that made GRUB useless for users having
old processors (such as 80486DX), even when they didn't use XFS in their
machines.
Also, adding a new filesystem might look trivial, but that still requires
modifications of some existing (important) files. So you need to be careful as
much as when adding a completely new feature. It's a fault of the current
implementation of GRUB.
Okuji
- Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff, (continued)
- Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff, Yoshinori Okuji, 2003/09/03
- Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff, Dr. Tilmann Bubeck, 2003/09/04
- Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff, Yoshinori Okuji, 2003/09/04
- Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff, Robert Millan, 2003/09/04
- Re: [Bug-grub] Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff, Jason Thomas, 2003/09/04
- Re: [Bug-grub] Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff, Yoshinori Okuji, 2003/09/05
- Re: [Bug-grub] Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff, Robert Millan, 2003/09/08
- Re: [Bug-grub] Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff, Timothy Baldwin, 2003/09/12
- Re: [Bug-grub] Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff, Yoshinori Okuji, 2003/09/13
Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff, Robert Millan, 2003/09/04
- Re: grub-0.93-win32-iso9660.diff,
Yoshinori Okuji <=