From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1FPizN-0007El-Tj for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Apr 2006 11:30:13 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FPizM-0007Di-Bi for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Apr 2006 11:30:12 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FPizK-0007CK-LC for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Apr 2006 11:30:11 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FPizJ-0007BG-SA for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Apr 2006 11:30:10 -0500 Received: from [194.109.24.25] (helo=smtp-vbr5.xs4all.nl) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FPj1x-0002zW-VV for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Apr 2006 11:32:54 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (249-174.surfsnel.dsl.internl.net [145.99.174.249]) by smtp-vbr5.xs4all.nl (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k31GU79Y057542 for ; Sat, 1 Apr 2006 18:30:08 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mgerards@xs4all.nl) Mail-Copies-To: mgerards@xs4all.nl To: The development of GRUB 2 References: <87y7yp8e6o.fsf@xs4all.nl> <200604011825.15250.okuji@enbug.org> From: Marco Gerards Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 18:30:52 +0200 In-Reply-To: <200604011825.15250.okuji@enbug.org> (Yoshinori K. Okuji's message of "Sat, 1 Apr 2006 18:25:14 +0200") Message-ID: <87u09d8dhf.fsf@xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner Subject: Re: TCP timers and telnet 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: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 16:30:12 -0000 "Yoshinori K. Okuji" writes: > On Saturday 01 April 2006 18:15, Marco Gerards wrote: >> So I was thinking, why not add such functionality to GRUB 2? It's >> easy to implement with the networking code I currently have. The only >> thing about it that sucks is that we have to implement multitheading, >> kinda... > > I object to multithreading. It makes our life just harder. I prefer an > event-driven approach as you suggested before. My previous suggestion would have worked, if you didn't telnet into GRUB. The current discussion is about having multiple different GRUB sessions simultaniously. So in that case you will need locking, etc. -- Marco