Hello Daniel,
On 10/21/19 4:26 PM, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 12:57:44PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> Hello Nicolas,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for the feedback.
>>
>> On 10/3/19 4:29 AM, Nicholas Vinson wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +if [ "x${GRUB_DISABLE_UUID}" = "xtrue" ]; then
>>>>> + if [ "x${GRUB_DISABLE_LINUX_UUID}" != "xfalse" ]; then
>>>>> + GRUB_DISABLE_LINUX_UUID="true"
>>>>> + fi
>>>>> + if [ "x${GRUB_DISABLE_LINUX_PARTUUID}" != "xfalse" ]; then
>>>>> + GRUB_DISABLE_LINUX_PARTUUID="true"
>>>>> + fi
>>>>> +fi
>>>
>>> I don't think this logic is exactly consistent with
>>> 51be3372ec8ba07ef68a409956ea0eefa89fe7c5. That commit assumes any value
>>> other than 'true' is false. It also sets the default values for
>>
>> I'm not sure how we could make it more consistent with the mentioned commit
>> while only setting it to 'true' if the user haven't explicitly set the var
>> as Dan asked in the previous version of the patch.
>
> It seems to me that it can be easily fixed, e.g.:
>
> if [ -z "${GRUB_DISABLE_LINUX_UUID}" ]; then
> GRUB_DISABLE_LINUX_UUID="true"
> fi
>
> Same for GRUB_DISABLE_LINUX_PARTUUID.
>
> Does it make sense?
>
Right, that makes sense. Thanks.
> Daniel
>
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Software Engineer - Desktop Hardware Enablement
Red Hat
_______________________________________________
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
