From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1M0ipk-0004mf-Mt for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 May 2009 17:02:48 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M0ipj-0004mI-LS for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 May 2009 17:02:47 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M0ipf-0004kB-0A for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 May 2009 17:02:47 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50458 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M0ipe-0004k3-LF for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 May 2009 17:02:42 -0400 Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:9157) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M0ipe-0003lF-95 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 May 2009 17:02:42 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO smtprelay1.cesmail.net) ([192.168.1.111]) by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 03 May 2009 17:02:35 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.151] (c-69-141-194-35.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [69.141.194.35]) by smtprelay1.cesmail.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A2ADD34C6D for ; Sun, 3 May 2009 17:01:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Pavel Roskin To: The development of GRUB 2 In-Reply-To: <20090503205429.GA8753@thorin> References: <20090502111547.GA28211@thorin> <1241325308.8745.39.camel@ct> <20090503165547.GC22078@thorin> <1241370273.4472.30.camel@ct> <20090503205429.GA8753@thorin> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 03 May 2009 17:02:33 -0400 Message-Id: <1241384553.2442.135.camel@ct> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.5 (2.24.5-1.fc10) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. Subject: Re: [PATCH] improve error messages in grub-setup 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: Sun, 03 May 2009 21:02:47 -0000 On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 22:54 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > On Sun, May 03, 2009 at 01:04:33PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 18:55 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > > > > > Agreed. It's no harm to add --force for users who are stuck in such layouts. > > > > > > Here's a new patch. > > > > I don't see the "force" variable affecting anything in setup() other > > than output. > > There is, see: > > + grub_util_warn ("Embedding is not possible. GRUB can only be installed in this " > + "setup by using blocklists. However, blocklists are UNRELIABLE and " > + "its use is discouraged."); > + if (! force) > + grub_util_error ("If you really want blocklists, use --force."); > > The first is always displayed, the latter only when we don't have --force Sorry, I missed the side effect of grub_util_error(). Never mind. > > grub_util_warn() doesn't set any flag that there have been > > warnings. > > That's an option, too. But it would preclude the possibility of issuing > warnings for which we don't want to require --force (i.e. lesser evils). > I wonder if that would be a problem? We can decide it when we know what the lesser evils are. I'm fine with your patch. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin