Re: [PATCH] Remove framework for external modules

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 09:20:58PM -0700, Joe Auricchio wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 14:13, Robert Millan<rmh@aybabtu.com> wrote:
> >
> > My bad...
> >
> > When I proposed adding a framework for building GRUB modules externally, I
> > was expecting it would end up being used.  I had grub-extras in mind.
> >
> > But it became much simpler and straightforwarded to build grub-extras by
> > overlaiing it into GRUB tree and doing a one-line change in GRUB Makefile.in.
> >
> > So I wonder if there's anyone reliing on this.  I believe there isn't, and I
> 
> I'm using it.
> 
> I am (my employer is) writing a set of modules to make grub do
> something it doesn't do yet. My employer prefers that I not discuss
> details at this time.
> 
> I really like keeping the module code completely separate from the
> common grub code. If the external build stuff goes away, I can work
> around it, but it's not preferred.
> 
> 
> > noticed that it's a nuissance because it installs headers in /usr/include which
> > may later be dragged in to a newer version of GRUB, causing breakage.
> 
> I don't need headers in /usr/include. In fact I am happy with an -I
> flag pointing to the grub source dir. I vote we stop installing the
> headers.
> 
> > So I admit having a bad idea and propose to undo it.  Maintaining features is
> > costly, we should only maintain features that are useful.
> 
> I understand this and I agree completely. But it doesn't seem to cost
> us anything *right now* to keep build_env.mk and the 'idea' of
> external modules. Can we leave this code alone until a real problem
> appears? I don't think it's hurting anyone right now?

Only the headers are problematic.

As for the rest, I suggest you look at how grub-extras does this now, but
if you still need this I don't mind keeping it around.

Do you mind if we stop installing headers then?

> (footnote) We are applying GPL license to these modules, but they'll
> never end up in the grub tree. Our requirements are too weird. You
> won't want to merge this code, believe me.

I understand.  Good luck with it!

-- 
Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."