On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 03:22:47AM +0900, OKUJI Yoshinori wrote:
> From: Thierry Laronde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: nbi : what kind of support do you wish ?
> Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 18:12:53 +0100
>
> > or in fact a `nbi' command loading the image (results will not be
> > the same).
>
> As I mentioned a while ago, I think adding NBI support into the
> command "kernel" is the best.
OK.
BTW, I'm trying to add a `getopt' function, starting with getopt.c from
glibc (there is a comment about this need in "builtins.c", and I need it for
`more'). Question : do we need to support GNU long options ? This is
compatible with the "user friendly" goals, but this is perhaps not that
necessary for the GRUB (I mean stage2, but if this is the case this will be
the case of grub)?
Other question. What do you think about trying to stick as much as possible
with a look and names of libraries conforming to standard libc, so that
perhaps, in the future ? compilation of stage2 or grub could be made not via
defines but with the option given to the compiler about the path of libraries
(say OS standard for grub, and ./include for stage2) ?
Regards,
--
Thierry LARONDE, Centre de Ressources Informatiques, Archamps - France
http://www.cri74.org
PingOO, serveur de com sur distribution GNU/Linux: http://www.pingoo.org
_______________________________________________
Bug-grub mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-grub
