From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1M4bXS-0003VH-IC for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 10:03:58 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M4bXQ-0003TX-Md for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 10:03:56 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M4bXM-0003Sn-07 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 10:03:56 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38564 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M4bXL-0003Sj-TC for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 10:03:51 -0400 Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:17640) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M4bXL-0000g3-B5 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 10:03:51 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO smtprelay2.cesmail.net) ([192.168.1.112]) by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 14 May 2009 10:03:50 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.22] (static-72-92-88-10.phlapa.fios.verizon.net [72.92.88.10]) by smtprelay2.cesmail.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 55AB234C6A for ; Thu, 14 May 2009 10:04:08 -0400 (EDT) From: Pavel Roskin To: The development of GRUB 2 In-Reply-To: References: <49E3E0FB.1070907@verizon.net> <1241384352.2442.133.camel@ct> <1241393832.6586.35.camel@accesodirecto.casa> <1241409431.26483.33.camel@mj> <1241635288.4535.6.camel@accesodirecto.casa> <1241875621.22837.24.camel@accesodirecto.casa> <1241883761.22837.97.camel@accesodirecto.casa> <1242265918.21129.27.camel@mj> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 10:03:48 -0400 Message-Id: <1242309828.12546.15.camel@mj> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.1 (2.26.1-2.fc11) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. Subject: Re: status grub2 port of grub-legasy map command 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: Thu, 14 May 2009 14:03:57 -0000 On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 08:49 +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: > Hello, I had two clear oppositions which weren't resolved. I don't > believe that merge patches screwing up the pendin oppositions is a > good practice. The opposition about declaration is based on another > handlers how it is used accross grub. Opposition about calling > biosdisk is technically relevant. Or perhaps I should start committing > anything without discussion? > Here is a fix patch. Could I commit it even if there will be oppositions? I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were opposed to the patch. I assumed that you just wanted to make some improvements. Nobody was against the drivemap command in principle. The discussion was about minor details. I'm fine with the change from "const void" to "const char", but we need to remove a preceding comment about void labels. As for the parse_biosdisk() change, I'd like to see an explanation. I understand you want to allow remapping invalid devices, and I'm fine with that. But then list_mappings() should be changed accordingly and revparse_biosdisk() may need to be eliminated. > > Logic in uninstall_int13_handler() has been fixed. > > > Which logic fix? > Other than variable rename it seems to be identical to Javier Martín's patch No, it was: if (grub_drivemap_int13_oldhandler != 0) return GRUB_ERR_NONE; The code was refusing to uninstall the handler if it was installed. I checked the logic by patching the chainloader code to return instead of giving control to the bootsector. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin