From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1D6blS-0001uE-C0 for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 16:52:18 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D6blQ-0001tp-JI for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 16:52:16 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D6blQ-0001tP-0k for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 16:52:16 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D6blP-0001t8-Hu for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 16:52:15 -0500 Received: from [212.43.237.68] (helo=kotoba.storever.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D6bUx-0001r3-SL for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 16:35:16 -0500 Received: from ASSP-nospam (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kotoba.storever.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 059CFFF0B4CF for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:35:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from 127.0.0.1 ([127.0.0.1] helo=localhost) by ASSP-nospam ; 2 Mar 05 21:35:12 -0000 From: "Yoshinori K. Okuji" Organization: enbug.org To: The development of GRUB 2 Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:36:52 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 References: <4225D5CE.4050909@auto.ucl.ac.be> In-Reply-To: <4225D5CE.4050909@auto.ucl.ac.be> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200503022236.52235.okuji@enbug.org> Subject: Re: compiling with 2.95 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, 02 Mar 2005 21:52:16 -0000 On Wednesday 02 March 2005 16:03, Vincent Guffens wrote: > 1) unnamed union > 2) declaration not at the beginning of a block > 3) undefined symbol (memset) I see. > Although I don't know if you are interrested in that or not, I'm > sending some modifications about these three items that allows grub 2 > to be compiled with 2.95.4 (at least on my system). Your patch is definitely useful. But I'm not sure about unnamed union... It is not so convenient to specify union names. I think the code was written by Marco, so I'd like to hear his opinion about this. > I'm not used to send patches so I might be doing something wrong, > please tell me if it is the case. Please write ChangeLog. Okuji