From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1JaDhT-0005vh-Ov for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:28:11 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JaDhR-0005ui-Mf for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:28:09 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JaDhO-0005si-UF for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:28:08 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JaDhO-0005sb-Lv for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:28:06 -0400 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 1JaDhO-0000t3-75 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:28:06 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO relay.cesmail.net) ([192.168.1.81]) by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 14 Mar 2008 13:28:13 -0400 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 30C7D619058 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:28:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Pavel Roskin To: The development of GRUB 2 In-Reply-To: References: <47D16136.1060705@nic.fi> <47D6F556.9040500@t-online.de> <47D9B1CF.30801@t-online.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:28:03 -0400 Message-Id: <1205515683.2321.18.camel@dv> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.3 (2.12.3-3.fc8) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. Subject: Re: [PATCH] cdrom access patch 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: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:28:10 -0000 On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 13:33 +0800, Bean wrote: > thanks a lot for your testing. if nobody objects, i would like to > commit it soon. It would be great if you posted the ChangeLog entry and explained the reason for the patch. I checked the thread, but I don't see it. Is it just going to affect access to the CD in the "no emulation" mode? Or maybe you are trying to make CD-ROM accessible if booting from the hard drive or another medium? What is the problem you are trying to solve? And what's wrong with the (cd0) name? I think it's more descriptive, and I don't care much if some other device like LS-120 is going to get such name. As for passing the boot driver data to multiboot kernels, I don't think it's useful to pass data about emulated drives. Besides, it should be easy to keep the BIOS number in memory for every drive, even if it's called (cd0). Compare how Linux is changing from naming CD-ROMs by the bus location (/dev/hdc, /dev/hdd) to naming by functionality with sequential numbers (/dev/scd0, /dev/scd1). Things like bus location should be transparent to the user. Better yet, all partitions should be identified by a unique ID, which is what serious distros should be doing. Still, (cd0) is more reliable and descriptive than (hd96) for casual use. Please note that I'm not objecting against the patch, I'm just asking for a better explanation to understand what the patch does and why. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin