Viswesh S wrote:
Hi,
I have a small suggestion.
Why cant we document in a small file, the procedures, or the dont's
while adding modules or modifying grub2.A FAQ file may be.
That will help us in the long run.
Viswesh
A) We have Wiki for that purpose. Please use that to fill this
Hi,
Colin D Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
I think we should remove conf/*.mk from the Subversion repository. If
people are going to be developing on GRUB and checking out svn
branches, then I think it's fine to require them to have Ruby. For
released tarballs that we expect
Marco Gerards wrote:
Colin D Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think we should remove conf/*.mk from the Subversion repository. If
people are going to be developing on GRUB and checking out svn
branches, then I think it's fine to require them to have Ruby. For
released tarballs that we
Am Dienstag, den 05.08.2008, 17:48 +0200 schrieb Marco Gerards:
Actually, since ruby is required to generate these files, I guess we
can better keep the .mk files.
Just a little note from me:
The Debian package build depends already on ruby so this won't be a
problem for all Debian guys
El mar, 05-08-2008 a las 17:48 +0200, Marco Gerards escribió:
Vesa Jääskeläinen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Marco Gerards wrote:
Colin D Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think we should remove conf/*.mk from the Subversion repository. If
people are going to be developing on GRUB and
On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 20:41:53 +0200
Javier Martín [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
El mar, 05-08-2008 a las 17:48 +0200, Marco Gerards escribió:
Vesa Jääskeläinen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Marco Gerards wrote:
Colin D Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think we should remove conf/*.mk from
2 grub-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Tuesday, 5 August, 2008 9:25:43 PM
Subject: Re: Remove conf/*.mk from svn
Am Dienstag, den 05.08.2008, 17:48 +0200 schrieb Marco Gerards:
Actually, since ruby is required to generate these files, I guess we
can better keep the .mk files.
Just a little note from me
On Friday 25 July 2008 22:43:10 Robert Millan wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 08:18:27AM -0700, Colin D Bennett wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 22:17:06 -0700 (PDT)
Viswesh S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have modified the conf/common.mk accordingly as shown below.
GRUB developers,
I
On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 00:28 +0200, Christian Franke wrote:
Pavel Roskin wrote:
At least we should put a message into *.mk files that would make it
clear that they are generated.
Yes.
Done.
For a release tarball, It IMO also makes sense to include
util/parser.tab.c. It is
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 20:41 +0200, Christian Franke wrote:
I agree, the files generated by ./autogen.sh should be included in
tarball, but not in the repo.
Additional prerequisites (autoconf, ruby) for builds from svn are IMO OK.
I agree.
At least we should put a message into *.mk files
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 22:17:06 -0700 (PDT)
Viswesh S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have modified the conf/common.mk accordingly as shown below.
GRUB developers,
I think we should remove conf/*.mk from the Subversion repository. If
people are going to be developing on GRUB and checking out svn
Colin D Bennett wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 22:17:06 -0700 (PDT)
Viswesh S ... wrote:
I have modified the conf/common.mk accordingly as shown below.
GRUB developers,
I think we should remove conf/*.mk from the Subversion repository. If
people are going to be developing on GRUB and
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 08:18:27AM -0700, Colin D Bennett wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 22:17:06 -0700 (PDT)
Viswesh S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have modified the conf/common.mk accordingly as shown below.
GRUB developers,
I think we should remove conf/*.mk from the Subversion
13 matches
Mail list logo
