Hi,
Vladimir Serbinenko:
> I think that old parser is better. The only reason the change happened
> is that it's a bug that sneaked in during migration to C. It should be
> fixed.
Andrei Borzenkov:
> [...] Nor do I actually like "pass anything you
> do not understand" - it has potential to break if grub-mkrescue gets
> new options.
I agree that it is a bug to make incompatible changes to the
grub-mkirescue CLI. But i also agree that this CLI is sub-optimal
in respect to future compatibility. It's just that i do not deem
sub-optimality a valid excuse for breaking interfaces.
Therefore my proposal to freeze grub-mkrescue CLI and to have
a new CLI with a new program name, while maintaining a common
backend for both CLI parsers.
> It is near to impossible to emulate old behavior using argp
What would be the advantage of using argp for the old CLI ?
The C version of the old CLI has the goal to be as compatible
as possible. It is straightforward to translate the shell code
of grub-mkrescue.in into equivalent C code.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Regardless which parser implementation gets chosen, there remains
the problem of the not yet implemented options from grub-mkrescue.in:
> > printc (_("Not supported any more are:"));
> > printc (_(" --modules , --grub-mkimage , --override-directory"));
Are their use cases obsolete ?
Shall their valid use cases be covered by other tools ?
Have a nice day :)
Thomas
_______________________________________________
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
