From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1KZsFu-0007Jj-7T for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:06:34 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KZsFs-0007H7-Dr for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:06:32 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KZsFp-0007Cv-En for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:06:30 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52862 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KZsFp-0007Cs-8s for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:06:29 -0400 Received: from mta-out.inet.fi ([195.156.147.13]:46163 helo=jenni1.inet.fi) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KZsFo-0001Vn-Pe for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:06:29 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (88.193.32.97) by jenni1.inet.fi (8.5.014) id 488F1534017D2596 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2008 22:06:27 +0300 Message-ID: <48BAEBC0.6090102@nic.fi> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 22:06:40 +0300 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Vesa_J=E4=E4skel=E4inen?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: The development of GRUB 2 References: <20080831164947.GA23030@thorin> <1220206028.13973.3.camel@dv> <20080831183741.GA8807@thorin> In-Reply-To: <20080831183741.GA8807@thorin> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Subject: Re: renaming util/biosdisk.c 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, 31 Aug 2008 19:06:32 -0000 Robert Millan wrote: > On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 02:07:08PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote: >> On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 18:49 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I think we discussed before about util/biosdisk.c being a confusing name, >>> but I can't find that thread. Did we agree on renaming it to something >>> else? If so, what to? >> My preference: >> util/hostdisk.c > > I like hostdisk too, as it's consistent with hostfs. Any objections to the > proposed rename? Nope.