grub-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [PATCH] don't abort with error if realpath fails


From: Yoshinori K. Okuji
Subject: Re: [PATCH] don't abort with error if realpath fails
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 13:54:48 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.8.2

On Friday 22 September 2006 08:44, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 07:42:38AM +0200, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> > On Thursday 21 September 2006 19:34, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > Sure.  The purpose of realpath here isn't really to verify device
> > > existance; that ought to happen later if (and only if) we're actualy
> > > going to use that device.
> > >
> > > Suppose this device.map:
> > >
> > > (hd0)     /dev/hda
> > > (xxx)     /dev/idontexist
> > >
> > > Theoricaly, when grub-setup is told to act on (hd0) it shouldn't care
> > > that /dev/idontexist doesn't exist (it could be listed because it was
> > > generated by an older grub, because the device disappeared, etc). 
> > > However, because of the realpath canonicalisation, as a collateral
> > > result we get to abort if _any_ of the entries are wrong:
> >
> > I understand what you mean. Thank you.
> >
> > > My point is that grub should be fault tollerant and not care that
> > > /dev/idontexist is broken, specialy since device.map is a file that is
> > > subject for input from either user or older grub (including grub
> > > legacy), and we have little control about its contents.
> >
> > I describe my own opinion here. GRUB itself must be extremely
> > fault-tolerant, as the user cannot boot up a machine if GRUB fails.
> > However, the installer of GRUB must be extremely error-sensitive, as the
> > user cannot boot up a machine if the installation happens _wrongly_. If a
> > device map contains any error, it's likely that the user made some
> > mistake or skip over erroneous information. Personally I much, much
> > prefer that GRUB is not installed in this case. Failing in installing
> > GRUB is better than making a machine unbootable.
>
> How could installation happen wrongly because of "(xxx) /dev/idontexist" ? 
> If we're trying to write to (xxx), that will fail;  otherwise, it doesn't
> interfere with what we're doing.

I do not want to repeat the same sentense. I said:

> > If a
> > device map contains any error, it's likely that the user made some
> > mistake or skip over erroneous information.

I do not like to accept a wrong device map, as it is obvious that the user is 
careless.

Okuji




reply via email to

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