From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1JCJ7m-000112-Gg for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:24:30 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JCJ7k-00010p-Lz for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:24:28 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JCJ7j-00010M-NP for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:24:28 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCJ7j-00010J-HZ for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:24:27 -0500 Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JCJ7j-0005Or-4t for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:24:27 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO relay.cesmail.net) ([192.168.1.81]) by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2008 13:24:26 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.21] (static-72-92-88-10.phlapa.fios.verizon.net [72.92.88.10]) by relay.cesmail.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F380A618FE1 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:24:25 -0500 (EST) From: Pavel Roskin To: The development of GRUB 2 In-Reply-To: <20080108105057.GA24604@thorin> References: <20080108105057.GA24604@thorin> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:24:25 -0500 Message-Id: <1199816665.30874.13.camel@dv> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.2 (2.12.2-2.fc8) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. Subject: Re: contradiction in boot/i386/pc/boot.S X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:24:28 -0000 On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 11:50 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > boot_drive_check: > jmp 1f /* grub-setup may overwrite this jump */ > testb $0x80, %dl > jnz 1f > movb $0x80, %dl > 1: > > However, if 0x80 is really "the only possible boot drive", that means the > test is pointless and can be replaced with: No, I was wrong, I misread "testb" as "cmpb". Values such as 0x81 are valid and should be preserved. Please ignore my previous message. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin