On 09/09/11 13:32, Seth Goldberg wrote:
On Sep 9, 2011, at 7:17 AM, Dave Miner wrote:
On 09/09/11 10:14, Seth Goldberg wrote:
On Sep 9, 2011, at 7:10 AM, Dave Miner<[email protected]> wrote:
On 09/09/11 05:03, Niall Power wrote:
Hi Seth,
I've taken your suggestions on board - but kept the "bios" part in the
file name :-)
So now it is ".bios-eltorito-img" instead of "bios-eltorito-boot"
New webrev:
https://cr.opensolaris.org/action/browse/caiman/niall/7052879-1/webrev-7052879-1/
The question that is unanswered for me is why pybootmgmt cannot keep its own
mess hidden rather than requiring DC to clean up after it. Are there other
uses of pybootmgmt that will result in debris elsewhere in the system?
This isn't pybootmgmt hiding debris-- it's up to the caller to take the
eltorito boot image and to move it somewhere appropriate, including renaming it.
OK, let me rephrase: why doesn't pybootmgmt provide an API that does exactly
that?
The API allows you to specify the directory, but not the filename because
the caller doesn't know what files are going to be created (since you might be
on any number of platforms).
I guess my naive view is that the library should know what filenames it
wants to standardize on and just do it. Having DC randomly inventing
some naming scheme that could just as easily be buried from it doesn't
seem like a win.
I'll approve the fix for integration, but I really hope the UEFI work
revises this design in favor of a little more convenience, as it seems
like there's unnecessary flexibility exposed to the callers.
Dave
_______________________________________________
caiman-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
