Vincent Pelletier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Marco Gerards wrote: >> This change is not required. We can better leave it as it was. > > So you'll have not to apply a part of the first patch in this thread, > because this one fixes an error in grub emu because I changed a > prototype in the first patch. > > I insist though that the time should be kept with the most > precision/value range we could give it.
For which reason? But if it should be more precise, it should be a grub_uint64_t. -- Marco _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
