[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: r2010

From: phcoder
Subject: Re: r2010
Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 00:22:32 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20090318)

Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
On Saturday 04 April 2009 04:56:14 Bean wrote:
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:43 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <address@hidden> wrote:
At r2010, Bean added fake_bios_data, and this function calls grub_printf.
Why not grub_dprintf? Was there any reason to print a message on the

Well, I'm actually planning to move fake_bios_data to a separate
module loadbios, so that linux loader would be cleaner.

I am afraid that you've got a disease of making more modules. This is a bad disease. I have seen some projects which failed in refactoring due to this disease (e.g. Zope3).

In this case I think that loadbios must be moved to a separate module. Not for microkernel or something. Just loadbios will also be used to boot multiboot kernels and perhaps bsd too. Also if EFI-related functions are moved to a separate module then i386/efi/linux.c can be merged to i386/linux.c (I'm also working on this)

Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko

reply via email to

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