On Aug 11, 2005, at 4:44 AM, Vincent Guffens wrote:
The first reference I could find in the gcc doc about unnamed union
was in 3.1.1,
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.1.1/gcc/Unnamed-
Fields.html#Unnamed%20Fields
If someone is however interrested, I have a version of grub (at least
6
On Aug 14, 2005, at 6:03 PM, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
On Monday 15 August 2005 00:27, Ruslan Nikolaev wrote:
Yesterday I sent patch for mmap support and x86_64 detection. What do
you
think about? I need to known about it becuase I'll be busy this
week...
Ruslan, I would ask for a different
On Monday 15 August 2005 00:27, Ruslan Nikolaev wrote:
> Yesterday I sent patch for mmap support and x86_64 detection. What do you
> think about? I need to known about it becuase I'll be busy this week...
The detection code should not be a part of the kernel. You can do this only
protected mode,
On Monday 15 August 2005 00:54, Douglas Wade Needham wrote:
> I agree that we should not continue to think about improvements, etc.
> However, if we are talking alpha/beta/rc stages, then we should be
> talking about a release branch, into which we only put controlled
> changes. Otherwise, we will
On Sunday 14 August 2005 23:05, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
> But I assume you are talking about my commits. I do receive error
> message about them every time and I have reported it to savannah
> administrators and they are investigating it. Some problems with UTF-8
> characters in my name or somethi
Quoting Yoshinori K. Okuji ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Sunday 14 August 2005 15:29, Douglas Wade Needham wrote:
> > BTW...If 1.9 is supposed to be indicating that we are nearing a 2.0
> > release, I don't think that now would be the time for such a major
> > change. After nearly 30 years of programm
Hi!
Yesterday I sent patch for mmap support and x86_64 detection. What do you think about?
I need to known about it becuase I'll be busy this week...
Ruslan.
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page ___
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-deve
On Sunday 14 August 2005 23:48, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
> As far I know, GRUB 2 doesn't support dynamic loading of function entry
> points, instead there are only two predefined entry points that can be
> called from modules so there has to be some interface for those if they
> are not implemented
Vladimir Serbinenko wrote:
> Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
>
>> I can try to draft out features that I think is needed and then we can
>> see what is still missing and when it is good enough then implement it.
>>
> But we need to let the room for the future growth. One of far-looking
> plans is
> "eye-
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> To those who have write access to the CVS: Please subscribe to the mailing
> list commit-grub. Otherwise, your commits won't be notified.
Actually they are automatic :)...
But I assume you are talking about my commits. I do receive error
message about them every time
To those who have write access to the CVS: Please subscribe to the mailing
list commit-grub. Otherwise, your commits won't be notified.
Okuji
___
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
On Sunday 14 August 2005 18:47, Vladimir Serbinenko wrote:
> But we need to let the room for the future growth. One of far-looking
> plans is
> "eye-candy" menu interface and we don't know yet what we will put there.
Good point. Just to give you some ideas, I attach an imaginary screenshot of a
f
Ok. At this moment I have one thing to do that will be approximately
finished
on Thursday and then I'll do it (on next Monday I suppose my assignment
will be finished)
Is it ok to create bison parser that will parse command by command and
create a pseudocode at output that can be easily executed?
On Sunday 14 August 2005 18:03, Vladimir Serbinenko wrote:
> It's only a question of syntax so it's ok but IMHO 2 points are important:
> 1) It must be possible to set additional attributes to a menu entry
I'd like to use options for these. Like this:
entry --label="gnu" --key="g" "GNU 0.3" {
Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
>I can try to draft out features that I think is needed and then we can
>
>
>see what is still missing and when it is good enough then implement it.
>
>
>
But we need to let the room for the future growth. One of far-looking
plans is
"eye-candy" menu interface and we d
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
>I have already proposed my idea of making each entry a function before. First,
>please describe why you don't think this is not enough.
>
>
>
It's only a question of syntax so it's ok but IMHO 2 points are important:
1) It must be possible to set additional attrib
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
>> First one is that there should be common virtual terminal for all arch's
>> and then separate graphics drivers that will do the actual drawing. In
>> this patch this is all implemented in one module and it is not as pretty
>> as it could be.
>
> Another way is to emula
On Sunday 14 August 2005 15:29, Douglas Wade Needham wrote:
> BTW...If 1.9 is supposed to be indicating that we are nearing a 2.0
> release, I don't think that now would be the time for such a major
> change. After nearly 30 years of programming, one of the problems I
> have seen in too many Open
On Sunday 14 August 2005 15:03, Marco Gerards wrote:
> There are also people using 286 computers, etc. My opinion is that we
> should focus on the most important things first. That is vt100/ansi
> support first. If someone really wants dumb terminal support he can
> explain why and he can implem
On Sunday 14 August 2005 13:52, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
> I have attached patch here that adds simple terminal that uses VESA BIOS
> Extension 2.0+ for rendering terminal. It is not meant to be included as
> is in GRUB 2, but I would hope that people would test it, so I could try
> to improve it f
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
>Only if you prove that the current implementation does not work, I will
>consider it.
>
>I have already investigated how other systems deal with Gate A20. For example,
>Linux does not do such a thing, but nobody has reported that it does not
>work.
>
>
>
Ok. after a
On Sunday 14 August 2005 11:18, Vladimir Serbinenko wrote:
> IMHO. Current system with title command is ugly because:
I have already proposed my idea of making each entry a function before. First,
please describe why you don't think this is not enough.
Okuji
___
On Sunday 14 August 2005 09:47, Vladimir Serbinenko wrote:
> >Do you mean 80386? Of course, no. I don't have such an old CPU.
> But some people use old PC like a home servers.
So?
> Perhaps if we read a huge block of memory it will do the trick?
Only if you prove that the current implementation
Douglas Wade Needham wrote:
>The problem with your idea is that it at least appears to be too
>Linux-centric, and forgets entirely about other operating systems,
>invalidating the "unified" part of the GRUB name. And I get fed up
>when on my machine which as FC3 has one of the OSes (along with Ne
The problem with your idea is that it at least appears to be too
Linux-centric, and forgets entirely about other operating systems,
invalidating the "unified" part of the GRUB name. And I get fed up
when on my machine which as FC3 has one of the OSes (along with NetBSD
and several others), up2date
Omniflux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi,
> Why anyone would now be using such a terminal I do not know, but if we
> do not mention the proper way to use such a terminal, or not to use
> such a terminal at all, I'm sure someone will try it.
There are also people using 286 computers, etc. My opin
Hi,
I have attached patch here that adds simple terminal that uses VESA BIOS
Extension 2.0+ for rendering terminal. It is not meant to be included as
is in GRUB 2, but I would hope that people would test it, so I could try
to improve it for greater compatibility (even though I have tried to
follow
IMHO. Current system with title command is ugly because:
-grub.cfg requires the separate parser. IMHO it should be
parsed the same way as user input.
-Even when scripting support will be ready it's impossible
to create multiple menus of the same kind by just a loop
(like
for x in /boot/
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
>
>Do you mean 80386? Of course, no. I don't have such an old CPU.
>
>
>
But some people use old PC like a home servers. But 80386 I
suppose is not very used because it can't have more than a few
hundred Mb hard disk, which is important criteria for home server,
more im
29 matches
Mail list logo
