Re: grub_halt()

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:24:39PM +0100, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> Felix Zielcke wrote:
> > grub_halt is on i386-pc defined as `void grub_halt (int no_apm)' but
> > everywhere else as `grub_halt (void)'
> > util/grub-emu.c has a #ifdef for these 2
> >
> > Shouldn't we just add an int parameter everywhere to make this more
> > simple?
> >
> >   
> I think in future we'll have more different halt methods on different
> platforms. So we could do:
> grub_halt (int methods)
> And have e.g.
> GRUB_HALT_DEFAULT_METHODS
> And e.g. on i386:
> #define GRUB_HALT_DEFAULT_METHODS
> (GRUB_HALT_APM|GRUB_HALT_ACPI|GRUB_HALT_HANG)

I was hoping we could remove complexity rather than add more of it.

Why would higher layer (who's just calling grub_halt because it wants the
system to shutdown) want to know about things like APM or ACPI ?

-- 
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."