From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.33) id 1CF7Ug-0001Aj-9a for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Oct 2004 04:49:55 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CF7Ud-0001Ab-Fg for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Oct 2004 04:49:51 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CF7Uc-0001AM-Gt for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Oct 2004 04:49:50 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CF7Ub-0001AH-S0 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Oct 2004 04:49:50 -0400 Received: from [212.43.237.68] (helo=kotoba.storever.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CF7Nq-0003FZ-IG for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Oct 2004 04:42:50 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kotoba.storever.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD142FF9F3DC for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:42:48 +0200 (CEST) From: "Yoshinori K. Okuji" Organization: enbug.org To: The development of GRUB 2 Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:43:08 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.1 References: <20040928190544.GA24852@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <200410011709.03394.okuji@enbug.org> <20041001215653.GA19015@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> In-Reply-To: <20041001215653.GA19015@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200410061043.09605.okuji@enbug.org> Subject: Re: Automagic command loading 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, 06 Oct 2004 08:49:51 -0000 On Friday 01 October 2004 23:56, Tomas Ebenlendr wrote: > But I have folowing questions: > > 1.) Should I throw away current implementation, or should there > be a module with this implementation (e.g. autocmd_elf.mod). If you think it is useful, you can commit it. But I don't see any benefit if we have another implementation. > 2.) I think, that having information about supported commands in > module is not bad. I can write tool, to read it (and generate > autocmd.lst from this information). Advantage will be following: > User1 compiles his own module and sends it to User2. User2 will > copy the module on proper location and run: > grub-mod-read-cmds the_module.mod >> autocmd.lst It sounds to me the same as telling User2 this: echo foo foo.mod >> autocmd.lst But it is up to you how to build autocmd.lst. If you think it is easier to use an ELF section, why not. But I'm a bit afraid of a too much dependency upon ELF. Okuji