From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1D0Qln-0003o8-Hv for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 15:55:07 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D0Ql0-0003ah-3d for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 15:54:18 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D0Qkh-0003Ri-Qf for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 15:54:01 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D0Qkg-0003Pk-71 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 15:53:58 -0500 Received: from [212.43.237.68] (helo=kotoba.storever.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D0QSa-0006r7-6H for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 15:35:16 -0500 Received: from ASSP-nospam (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kotoba.storever.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BD9AFE9ADFF for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 21:35:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from 127.0.0.1 ([127.0.0.1] helo=localhost) by ASSP-nospam ; 13 Feb 05 20:35:15 -0000 From: "Yoshinori K. Okuji" Organization: enbug.org To: The development of GRUB 2 Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 21:36:21 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 References: <20050213151851.GA4056@miracle> <200502131949.54146.okuji@enbug.org> <87acq8tfhu.fsf@marco.marco-g.com> In-Reply-To: <87acq8tfhu.fsf@marco.marco-g.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200502132136.21750.okuji@enbug.org> Subject: Re: [patch] configfile 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, 13 Feb 2005 20:55:06 -0000 On Sunday 13 February 2005 20:41, Marco Gerards wrote: > It just seems it a bit awkward to me. I have no idea how big the > stack is on the PC and if it will cause problems. I don't know, either, but I guess it would consume less than 1KB per configfile, because large data is allocated on the heap but not on the stack. If you don't like it, it is feasible to push the context of current configuration and call longjmp to start a new configuration. I think this is tricky. Okuji