From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71) id 1S5fPc-0008ET-8V for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:37:52 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33128) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5fPV-0008Dl-Tf for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:37:50 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5fPM-0001Vw-1u for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:37:45 -0500 Received: from mail-ee0-f41.google.com ([74.125.83.41]:37663) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5fPL-0001Vd-PK for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:37:35 -0500 Received: by eeke53 with SMTP id e53so201116eek.0 for ; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:37:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ql5uKc0PNfaJ+sFJ1lZUIpkocB2lgtmch3Hcb4HID58=; b=aVpfb0F5kdFzeoqsy4vY/rnrxK47LgDQOiilNn/rD1WlMqIHM6sxuFCZXj7BITVbl+ EcLpVzUsORLRjEcSb1YUbV6zNijdW5gwYkoiXtJ8wyvl13gl/jRBSO6sV6YK1ZAHCila ayTqRlJvhHoRJ1ORWLDE8ZOhXMjc62Ue8MszcplbWkKHHyvkLFz5QPRlcv3xiUiFg8md cGvLTtcOyueCtCFS2xeiSVOchsJ2AuXvGTNVkEbwZCazY8xR8vga44U3diBlYDRcoJJl MqN8ytTyzjbcIrflfvyrBX8bUM6otCTBh92SQWBKQ3HU/uU8VqrxJFYYHiJKxLzTUDmp Rdxw== Received: by 10.14.50.74 with SMTP id y50mr2319716eeb.107.1331221053565; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:37:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from debian.x201.phnet (91-233.197-178.cust.bluewin.ch. [178.197.233.91]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o49sm7256832eeb.7.2012.03.08.07.37.31 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:37:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F58D23A.5020508@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:37:30 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?VmxhZGltaXIgJ8+GLWNvZGVyL3BoY29kZXInIFNlcmJpbmVua28=?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20120216 Icedove/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: grub-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: [BUG] GRUBs option parsing needs fixing References: <4F541349.7070704@anvo-it.de> <4F541723.6030105@gmail.com> <4F54A094.1000000@anvo-it.de> <4F54B78B.9010707@gmail.com> <4F54DF19.7000804@anvo-it.de> <4F58B03E.2050908@anvo-it.de> <4F58BEE8.3050006@gmail.com> <4F58C2E7.6080000@gmail.com> <4F58CA35.2060506@anvo-it.de> <4F58CDAD.3010300@gmail.com> <20120308152804.GR14853@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> In-Reply-To: <20120308152804.GR14853@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 74.125.83.41 X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GNU GRUB List-Id: The development of GNU GRUB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:37:50 -0000 On 08.03.2012 16:28, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 04:18:05PM +0100, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: >> We don't have to recreate whole GNU in GRUB either, we don't write >> an OS but a bootloader. In particular having -xfoo for isn't >> necessarry and moreover it will conflict with >> search -su > So a 'short' option that looks like a 'long' option? > > Or is that -s and -u together? It's -s and -u together and so -s has no argument. With Andreas proposition "u" would be the argument > Options can get confusing at times? > >> which is already used in the wild. >> The case of --long-option optional argument can be changed >> especially taking into account migration from 1.98 but -xfoo is >> probably out of the question. > I don't see how -xfoo where foo is a parameter for -x can work if you > support multiple short options being merged (which seems common in > GNU programs). You can if when encountering an option needing parameter you parse the rest as parameter. But then again optional parameter are tricky. Behaviour similar to other GNU is important but compatibility with previous version of GRUB is more so, especially when it comes to the rarely used features like -xfoo. -- Regards Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko