Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > Randy McMurchy wrote: > >> http://blfs-bugs.linuxfromscratch.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1019 > > > This is almost properly fixed in SVN. "almost" because of unconditional > "sleep 1". If you move "sleep 1" at the bottom of the loop, instead of > the top, the fix will be better. >
Thank you Alexander. I'll take care of that soon. It hadn't occured to me that this would matter because it happens behind the rest of the boot process, but the extra second saved is exactly that....regardless if it's in the background or not. > And there's absolutely no need for any dual handler/bootscript setup. > Actually, that was the reason it was left open, I had just forgotten about it and not brought it up again. What better time than now? Anyone see any problems with it as is, or want/need the bootscript returned? -- DJ Lucas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
