[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
some design issues
From: |
Yoshinori K. Okuji |
Subject: |
some design issues |
Date: |
Mon, 14 Feb 2005 22:25:36 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.7.1 |
I'd like to hear your opinions about some design-related issues.
Currently, GRUB 2 uses grub.cfg as the name of a default config file. I
chose this, according to a private discussion between me and Jeremy
Katz. He pointed out that the user did not find a config file if it was
menu.lst, because he/she simply ran "locate grub". So the Red Hat
version of GRUB legacy makes a symlink to menu.lst as grub.conf. I said
that this name does not fit in 8.3 format. He agreed but he didn't want
to discuss what name should be better.
I think the name "menu.lst" is really strange, so I don't like it. But I
don't know if grub.cfg is nice. What do you think? I sometimes think
that "grubrc" might be better (like "bashrc").
Next thing. I think it is a bad idea to make the variable for a menu
global, because this is not compatible with having multiple nested
menus. But some commands want to access information on the environment
(such as current menu). I can think of two ways to address this issue:
1. Pass one more argument to each command. This argument would be a
pointer to struct context, and contains a pointer to current menu, etc.
2. Provide global functions to access information. These functions would
have to use global variables.
I don't know which is better.
Okuji