[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

From: Drew Rosen
Subject: Re: no commit allowed under discussion
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 01:23:31 -0700

Hi Peter Cros,

If you need anyone to run tests on the Xserve, I have a score of machines that we want to use on Linux...

On Apr 9, 2009, at 7:23 AM, Peter Cros wrote:

It will be good to get this resolved and on SVN grub2 so people
(ubuntuforums) can build for Apple efi with the latest 'hacks'
(fakebios, loadbios etc) found necessary in testing. Particlarly
Xserve which requires efi boot.

On 4/7/09, Bean <address@hidden> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <address@hidden> wrote:
On Tuesday 07 April 2009 01:43:17 Bean wrote:
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bean <address@hidden> wrote:
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <address@hidden >
I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split modules. Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to follow
such a fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.


I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list for
sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.


How about this patch ? The split is necessary as it introduces new
command loadbios and fakebios that uses the fake_bios_data function,
and it would be ugly to put them all inside linux.c.

Do you have any strong reason to make loadbios and fakebios separate? I
the overhead is negligible.


loadbios and fakebios are sort of like hacks for the efi platform, I
think they shouldn't be placed in the linux loader. Also, by moving
the platform dependent code out, we can merge it with i386 generic
loader loader/i386/linux.c.


Grub-devel mailing list

Cros (pxw)

Grub-devel mailing list

reply via email to

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