On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:54:43PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
BTW GPT module checks the protective MBR. In some cases when legay OS
modified the MBR it's no longer protective MBR. And in theese cases
GRUB will refuse to boot. Isn't the magic number check enough?
If there's at least one protective
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 10:06:40PM +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
Robert Millan wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 02:07:08PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 18:49 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Hi,
I think we discussed before about util/biosdisk.c being a confusing name,
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 09:21:30PM +0800, Bean wrote:
Hi,
2008-09-01 Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* disk/ata.c (grub_apapi_open): Initialize devfnd, no need to set
scsi-name and scsi-luns, as they will be set in grub_scsi_open.
* disk/scsi.c (grub_scsi_open): Don't call
This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all.
Quoting Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
Why i386? That code is not i386 specific. Cannot we call it common2
or something like that?
I believe we could declare SPARC broken, but keep PowerPC working.
The PowerPC code can be
Pavel Roskin wrote:
I believe we could declare SPARC broken, but keep PowerPC working. The
PowerPC code can be cross-compiled and tested in qemu. I can send my
testing scripts if you want.
Can you put that on Wiki?
___
Grub-devel mailing list
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:49:02AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
Quoting Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
Why i386? That code is not i386 specific.
It is. Notice it's being moved from conf/i386-*.rmk, not common.rmk.
normal:
Robert Millan wrote:
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:49:02AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
Quoting Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
Why i386? That code is not i386 specific.
It is. Notice it's being moved from conf/i386-*.rmk, not
Robert Millan wrote:
On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 08:12:02PM +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
Hi All,
As our release plan is rotting a bit, I zapped current plan on Wiki and
here is my proposal for plan targetting 2.0 gold release.
== 1.97 ==
Estimate Date:: 2008-??-?? (ASAP)
Release
Felix Zielcke wrote on 20080903:
could you please address Marco's issues and send a new patch so the
topic is brought up again?
Yes, I'll make some time for it.
regards,
Hans Lambermont
--
Hans Lambermont, M.Sc. - Newtec - OS-PlatformVAS
http://newtec.eu/t:+31408519234
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 16:11 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Hi,
I'm confused as to what halt --no-apm could be useful for. The code in
startup.S seems to check for APM before using it. Is there any reason why
users would want an infin loop even when power-off is possible?
I guess the
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 06:17:34PM +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
Robert Millan wrote:
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:49:02AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
Quoting Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
Why i386? That code is not i386
Robert Millan wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:54:43PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
BTW GPT module checks the protective MBR. In some cases when legay OS
modified the MBR it's no longer protective MBR. And in theese cases
GRUB will refuse to boot. Isn't the magic number check enough?
If there's
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 12:58:57PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 16:11 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Hi,
I'm confused as to what halt --no-apm could be useful for. The code in
startup.S seems to check for APM before using it. Is there any reason why
users would want
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 20:29 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
Though, for grub-emu the problem you describe is not significant, since the
BIOS isn't there to missbehave. Perhaps we could make i386-pc's grub-emu
use grub_halt (void) instead?
Fine with me. If somebody really needs --no-apm (which I
phcoder wrote:
Hello. As I said in another email there is no need for it. I send a
patch for it.
Doesn't this break our rescue mode ?
___
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 04:48:29PM +, Jonathan A. Kollasch wrote:
hi,
Robert noted that I should mention this:
The ELF section header table MBI seems to not be implemented in grub2.
NetBSD/i386 uses this to find symbol names in it's kernel debugger.
For the record (Jonathan already
Javier Martín wrote:
El lun, 08-09-2008 a las 22:48 +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen escribió:
phcoder wrote:
Hello. As I said in another email there is no need for it. I send a
patch for it.
Doesn't this break our rescue mode ?
How would it? As with other commands, there would be two versions of
Am Donnerstag, den 04.09.2008, 20:21 +0200 schrieb Felix Zielcke:
I think also that the SVN approach would be the better one.
Shouldn't be too hard to replace that `make
dist'/DISTLIST/gendistlist.sh stuff with a small script which uses SVN
for this.
I played now a bit with `git-svn' and
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 12:02:30AM +0200, Felix Zielcke wrote:
There seems to be now a increased git interest floating around ;)
Gah, no that was just me porting a program to Multiboot, which happened to
be hosted on git ;-)
So I think just ditching the old method completely and just depending
Robert Millan wrote:
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 08:27:05PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
Robert Millan wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:54:43PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
BTW GPT module checks the protective MBR. In some cases when legay OS
modified the MBR it's no longer protective MBR. And in theese cases
Robert Millan wrote:
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 08:27:05PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
Robert Millan wrote:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:54:43PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
BTW GPT module checks the protective MBR. In some cases when legay OS
modified the MBR it's no longer protective MBR. And in theese cases
Hello. I had conflicts in .mk files after svn up so I removed all the
.mk. common.mk and i386-pc.mk were regenerated correctly but not i386.mk
$ make
conf/i386-pc.mk:3394: conf/i386.mk: No such file or directory
make: *** No rule to make target `conf/i386.mk'. Stop.
Can someone familiar with
As far as I know, the root= line is passed as one of the parameters to
the booting kernel, so it shouldn't matter what version of Grub you're
using. For instance, if you're running Linux, look at the Linux kernel
documentation for the kernel in /Documentation/kernel-paraemeters.txt --
you'll
On Monday 08 September 2008 9:26:54 pm Greg White wrote:
As far as I know, the root= line is passed as one of the parameters to
the booting kernel, so it shouldn't matter what version of Grub you're
using. For instance, if you're running Linux, look at the Linux kernel
documentation for the
25 matches
Mail list logo
