From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1Jc6Tf-0000FF-AA for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:09:43 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jc6Td-0000EN-EH for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:09:41 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jc6Ta-0000Cx-7y for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:09:39 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jc6TZ-0000Cn-UQ for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:09:37 -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 1Jc6TZ-0000nm-9k for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:09:37 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO relay.cesmail.net) ([192.168.1.81]) by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 19 Mar 2008 18:09:36 -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 9C8F8619058 for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:09:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Pavel Roskin To: The development of GRUB 2 In-Reply-To: References: <47D9B1CF.30801@t-online.de> <1205515683.2321.18.camel@dv> <47DAE712.6070805@nic.fi> <1205728263.2220.10.camel@dv> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:09:35 -0400 Message-Id: <1205964575.6769.14.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: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 22:09:42 -0000 On Mon, 2008-03-17 at 14:21 +0800, Bean wrote: > > At what point do we need to use the _name_ to calculate the BIOS number? > > Why cannot we simply store that number into some field? > > If we use (cd0) as primary name, there are three places where the > cdrom has to been checked. > > 1. make_install_device in init.c. > Here, given the boot drive number grub_boot_drive, we need to figure > out the root device name. This is outside biosdisk, can't access > device or disk. OK, I see. It looks like the names are closely tied to the BIOS numbers. Essentially, (fd0) is "(bios0)" and (hd0) is "(bios80)". Yes, we could extend that notation for "cd" devices, but it would complicate the boot code that should be kept minimal. I think it's OK to apply your patch, unless there are other objections. Perhaps it's even better to apply the patch without the "cd" alias, so that the aliases can be implemented separately in a more generic way. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin