From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71) id 1XYV55-0003Ll-Tw for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 03:09:11 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47765) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XYV4w-0003KO-GD for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 03:09:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XYV4q-0006R3-Ng for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 03:09:02 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:50690) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XYV4q-0006Ql-CX for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 03:08:56 -0400 Received: from scdbackup.webframe.org ([87.167.175.229]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MXq3L-1XnBxN1xln-00Wlyd for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 09:08:50 +0200 Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 09:07:51 +0200 From: "Thomas Schmitt" To: grub-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: About the CLI of both grub-mkrescue versions Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <26976546057851911994@scdbackup.webframe.org> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:yd+HVrr9dsh0j+BjB+7KmqxFcnzXIP0hX7713IdcPcnOuF67Vl1 cQTGZx7uIvrVPlh/M1k7fkLElyXgYJAnjmSll7LOxcS7G+MCGPbg1rOQyOslrcYeJ2UlISs W6qUkeeyLcgHw2+dzI20PDwV2xFBUL4N+1LAekJuimEkL8CJ3Lmq7a87gJuxqFpBBY7nRIG bHuBrGbQx/W2Y7lj9t/DA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.15.18 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: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 07:09:08 -0000 Hi, me: > > grub-mkiso.c Andrei Borzenkov: > What's the point of having to maintain two versions instead of one? Well, as stated: > > This would avoid to bother scripting users of grub-mkrescue > > or maintainers of things like > > http://www.unix.com/man-page/linux/1/GRUB-MKRESCUE/ Besides sabotageing scripts which use old grub-mkrescue, the current state of grub-mkrescue.c also makes it hard to write scripts which work with both, GRUB 2.00 and 2.02. The documentation of the current state of grub-mkrescue.c would have to be something like: "Find out what version of grub-mkrescue you are running. If it is the new one of GRUB 2.02 or later, then use argument "--" between its own arguments and the arguments by which you announce your payload files to xorriso. If it is the old one, then do not use argument "--" unless you want xorriso to end its mkisofs emulation and thus to demand native xorriso commands as further input." With my proposal it would rather be: "grub-mkrescue is frozen and will not be augmented by new features. The new program grub-mkiso takes the same options as grub-mkrescue plus some more. The main difference between both is that you have to separate the grub-mkiso options from the xorriso -as mkisofs options by a double dash "--", which will not be forwarded to xorriso." The compatibility mode will not need permanent maintainance. It will rather be an alternative way to override the defaults of some of the global variables in grub-mkrescue.c. Once the legacy parser function is written, it can stay as it is. Only if the variable names or meanings change, this has to be reflected in the legacy parser function. The other tasks which i mentioned, have to be addressed anyway, because currently the documentation of grub-mkrescue is flatly wrong in the program and in the .texi file. Have a nice day :) Thomas