"Ruslan Nikolaev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I agree. This is more readable.
>
> I can change it of course... But it is not so bad:
>
> 1. if elf class == 64 => using ELF64 validate & loading code
>
> 2. else:
>
> - validate header by grub_dl_check_header(). Function
> grub_dl_check_header() a
On Wednesday 20 July 2005 01:01, Ruslan Nikolaev wrote:
> > I agree. This is more readable.
>
> I can change it of course... But it is not so bad:
Well, I think the problem is that there is no meaning to use a union here, and
it makes the function too long.
> Ok... But first I have a question ab
> I agree. This is more readable.
I can change it of course... But it is not so bad:
1. if elf class == 64 => using ELF64 validate & loading code
2. else:
- validate header by grub_dl_check_header(). Function grub_dl_check_header() also will check that elf class is 32-bit.
and so on...
I'm very bus
On Friday 15 July 2005 00:42, Ruslan Nikolaev wrote:
> Yesterday I sent patch for ELF64 multiboot support:
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2005-07/msg00102.html
>
> Any ideas about it?
I don't like the idea of converting 64 to 32. If you need to support 64-bit
ELF, you should add
Yesterday I sent patch for ELF64 multiboot support:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2005-07/msg00102.html
Any ideas about it?
--
___Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
__
