no commit allowed under discussion

no commit allowed under discussion

[Yoshinori K. Okuji]

I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split modules. 
Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to follow such a 
fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.

Regards,
Okuji

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

[Bean]

On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org> wrote:
> I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split modules.
> Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to follow such a
> fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.

Hi,

I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list for
sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.

-- 
Bean

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

[Bean]

On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org> wrote:
>> I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split modules.
>> Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to follow such a
>> fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.
>
> Hi,
>
> I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
> grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list for
> sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.

Hi,

How about this patch ? The split is necessary as it introduces new
command loadbios and fakebios that uses the fake_bios_data function,
and it would be ugly to put them all inside linux.c.

-- 
Bean

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

[Yoshinori K. Okuji]

On Tuesday 07 April 2009 01:43:17 Bean wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org> 
wrote:
> >> I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split
> >> modules. Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to follow
> >> such a fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
> > grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list for
> > sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.
>
> Hi,
>
> How about this patch ? The split is necessary as it introduces new
> command loadbios and fakebios that uses the fake_bios_data function,
> and it would be ugly to put them all inside linux.c.

Do you have any strong reason to make loadbios and fakebios separate? I think 
the overhead is negligible.

Regards,
Okuji

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

[phcoder]

Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 April 2009 01:43:17 Bean wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org> 
> wrote:
>>>> I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split
>>>> modules. Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to follow
>>>> such a fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
>>> grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list for
>>> sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.
>> Hi,
>>
>> How about this patch ? The split is necessary as it introduces new
>> command loadbios and fakebios that uses the fake_bios_data function,
>> and it would be ugly to put them all inside linux.c.
> 
> Do you have any strong reason to make loadbios and fakebios separate? I think 
> the overhead is negligible.
>

this module is useful in conjunction with other loaders (multiboot, bsd, 
pc_chainloader) as well

> Regards,
> Okuji
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> Grub-devel@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel


-- 

Regards
Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

[Bean]

On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org> wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 April 2009 01:43:17 Bean wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org>
> wrote:
>> >> I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split
>> >> modules. Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to follow
>> >> such a fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
>> > grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list for
>> > sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> How about this patch ? The split is necessary as it introduces new
>> command loadbios and fakebios that uses the fake_bios_data function,
>> and it would be ugly to put them all inside linux.c.
>
> Do you have any strong reason to make loadbios and fakebios separate? I think
> the overhead is negligible.

Hi,

loadbios and fakebios are sort of like hacks for the efi platform, I
think they shouldn't be placed in the linux loader. Also, by moving
the platform dependent code out, we can merge it with i386 generic
loader loader/i386/linux.c.

-- 
Bean

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

[Peter Cros]

Hi,
It will be good to get this resolved and on SVN grub2 so people
(ubuntuforums) can build for Apple efi with the latest 'hacks'
(fakebios, loadbios etc) found necessary in testing. Particlarly
Xserve which requires efi boot.


On 4/7/09, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org> wrote:
>> On Tuesday 07 April 2009 01:43:17 Bean wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org>
>> wrote:
>>> >> I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split
>>> >> modules. Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to follow
>>> >> such a fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
>>> > grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list for
>>> > sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> How about this patch ? The split is necessary as it introduces new
>>> command loadbios and fakebios that uses the fake_bios_data function,
>>> and it would be ugly to put them all inside linux.c.
>>
>> Do you have any strong reason to make loadbios and fakebios separate? I
>> think
>> the overhead is negligible.
>
> Hi,
>
> loadbios and fakebios are sort of like hacks for the efi platform, I
> think they shouldn't be placed in the linux loader. Also, by moving
> the platform dependent code out, we can merge it with i386 generic
> loader loader/i386/linux.c.
>
> --
> Bean
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> Grub-devel@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>


-- 
Cros (pxw)

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

[Yoshinori K. Okuji]

On Tuesday 07 April 2009 14:25:53 Bean wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 07 April 2009 01:43:17 Bean wrote:
> >> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org>
> >
> > wrote:
> >> >> I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split
> >> >> modules. Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to follow
> >> >> such a fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
> >> > grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list for
> >> > sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> How about this patch ? The split is necessary as it introduces new
> >> command loadbios and fakebios that uses the fake_bios_data function,
> >> and it would be ugly to put them all inside linux.c.
> >
> > Do you have any strong reason to make loadbios and fakebios separate? I
> > think the overhead is negligible.
>
> Hi,
>
> loadbios and fakebios are sort of like hacks for the efi platform, I
> think they shouldn't be placed in the linux loader. Also, by moving
> the platform dependent code out, we can merge it with i386 generic
> loader loader/i386/linux.c.

I reviewed your patch again, and I confirmed that it was good. Thanks.

Regards,
Okuji

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

[Bean]

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 7:26 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org> wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 April 2009 14:25:53 Bean wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org> wrote:
>> > On Tuesday 07 April 2009 01:43:17 Bean wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org>
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >> >> I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split
>> >> >> modules. Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to follow
>> >> >> such a fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.
>> >> >
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
>> >> > grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list for
>> >> > sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> How about this patch ? The split is necessary as it introduces new
>> >> command loadbios and fakebios that uses the fake_bios_data function,
>> >> and it would be ugly to put them all inside linux.c.
>> >
>> > Do you have any strong reason to make loadbios and fakebios separate? I
>> > think the overhead is negligible.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> loadbios and fakebios are sort of like hacks for the efi platform, I
>> think they shouldn't be placed in the linux loader. Also, by moving
>> the platform dependent code out, we can merge it with i386 generic
>> loader loader/i386/linux.c.
>
> I reviewed your patch again, and I confirmed that it was good. Thanks.

Hi,

Thanks, commit it now.

-- 
Bean

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

[Drew Rosen]

Hi Peter Cros,

If you need anyone to run tests on the Xserve, I have a score of  
machines that we want to use on Linux...



On Apr 9, 2009, at 7:23 AM, Peter Cros wrote:

> Hi,
> It will be good to get this resolved and on SVN grub2 so people
> (ubuntuforums) can build for Apple efi with the latest 'hacks'
> (fakebios, loadbios etc) found necessary in testing. Particlarly
> Xserve which requires efi boot.
>
>
> On 4/7/09, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji  
>> <okuji@enbug.org> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 07 April 2009 01:43:17 Bean wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org 
>>>>> >
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to  
>>>>>> split
>>>>>> modules. Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to  
>>>>>> follow
>>>>>> such a fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
>>>>> grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list  
>>>>> for
>>>>> sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> How about this patch ? The split is necessary as it introduces new
>>>> command loadbios and fakebios that uses the fake_bios_data  
>>>> function,
>>>> and it would be ugly to put them all inside linux.c.
>>>
>>> Do you have any strong reason to make loadbios and fakebios  
>>> separate? I
>>> think
>>> the overhead is negligible.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> loadbios and fakebios are sort of like hacks for the efi platform, I
>> think they shouldn't be placed in the linux loader. Also, by moving
>> the platform dependent code out, we can merge it with i386 generic
>> loader loader/i386/linux.c.
>>
>> --
>> Bean
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Grub-devel mailing list
>> Grub-devel@gnu.org
>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Cros (pxw)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> Grub-devel@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

[Peter Cros]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2645 bytes --]

Hi,
SVN rev 2074 should be good for Xserve1,1 and 1,2 according to tests we ran
at ubuntu forums.

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Drew Rosen <drewsta@mac.com> wrote:

> Hi Peter Cros,
>
> If you need anyone to run tests on the Xserve, I have a score of machines
> that we want to use on Linux...
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 9, 2009, at 7:23 AM, Peter Cros wrote:
>
>  Hi,
>> It will be good to get this resolved and on SVN grub2 so people
>> (ubuntuforums) can build for Apple efi with the latest 'hacks'
>> (fakebios, loadbios etc) found necessary in testing. Particlarly
>> Xserve which requires efi boot.
>>
>>
>> On 4/7/09, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday 07 April 2009 01:43:17 Bean wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split
>>>>>>> modules. Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to follow
>>>>>>> such a fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
>>>>>> grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list for
>>>>>> sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> How about this patch ? The split is necessary as it introduces new
>>>>> command loadbios and fakebios that uses the fake_bios_data function,
>>>>> and it would be ugly to put them all inside linux.c.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do you have any strong reason to make loadbios and fakebios separate? I
>>>> think
>>>> the overhead is negligible.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> loadbios and fakebios are sort of like hacks for the efi platform, I
>>> think they shouldn't be placed in the linux loader. Also, by moving
>>> the platform dependent code out, we can merge it with i386 generic
>>> loader loader/i386/linux.c.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bean
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Grub-devel mailing list
>>> Grub-devel@gnu.org
>>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Cros (pxw)
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Grub-devel mailing list
>> Grub-devel@gnu.org
>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> Grub-devel@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>



-- 
Cros (pxw)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4841 bytes --]

Re: no commit allowed under discussion

[Peter Cros]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3031 bytes --]

I posted binaries from grub2 rev 2074 with all modules, for further
evaluation -
 http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=7061606&postcount=595

(post #595 grub2074.tar.gz )

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Peter Cros <pxwpxw8@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> SVN rev 2074 should be good for Xserve1,1 and 1,2 according to tests we ran
> at ubuntu forums.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Drew Rosen <drewsta@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Peter Cros,
>>
>> If you need anyone to run tests on the Xserve, I have a score of machines
>> that we want to use on Linux...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 9, 2009, at 7:23 AM, Peter Cros wrote:
>>
>>  Hi,
>>> It will be good to get this resolved and on SVN grub2 so people
>>> (ubuntuforums) can build for Apple efi with the latest 'hacks'
>>> (fakebios, loadbios etc) found necessary in testing. Particlarly
>>> Xserve which requires efi boot.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/7/09, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday 07 April 2009 01:43:17 Bean wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <okuji@enbug.org>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  I've undone r2063, since we're still discussing how to / not to split
>>>>>>>> modules. Bean, you must respect teamwork. If you are unable to
>>>>>>>> follow
>>>>>>>> such a fundamental rule, I will have to disable your permission.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought the previous mail is about replacing grub_printf with
>>>>>>> grub_dprint, I'm ok with that. This patch has been in mail list for
>>>>>>> sometime, it is essential to get a working display in intel macs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about this patch ? The split is necessary as it introduces new
>>>>>> command loadbios and fakebios that uses the fake_bios_data function,
>>>>>> and it would be ugly to put them all inside linux.c.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have any strong reason to make loadbios and fakebios separate? I
>>>>> think
>>>>> the overhead is negligible.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> loadbios and fakebios are sort of like hacks for the efi platform, I
>>>> think they shouldn't be placed in the linux loader. Also, by moving
>>>> the platform dependent code out, we can merge it with i386 generic
>>>> loader loader/i386/linux.c.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Bean
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Grub-devel mailing list
>>>> Grub-devel@gnu.org
>>>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cros (pxw)
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Grub-devel mailing list
>>> Grub-devel@gnu.org
>>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Grub-devel mailing list
>> Grub-devel@gnu.org
>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cros (pxw)
>
>
>


-- 
Cros (pxw)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5569 bytes --]