|
| From: | phcoder |
| Subject: | Re: r2010 |
| Date: | Sat, 04 Apr 2009 00:22:32 +0200 |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090318) |
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
On Saturday 04 April 2009 04:56:14 Bean wrote:On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:43 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <address@hidden> wrote:At r2010, Bean added fake_bios_data, and this function calls grub_printf. Why not grub_dprintf? Was there any reason to print a message on the screen?Hi, Well, I'm actually planning to move fake_bios_data to a separate module loadbios, so that linux loader would be cleaner.I am afraid that you've got a disease of making more modules. This is a bad disease. I have seen some projects which failed in refactoring due to this disease (e.g. Zope3).
In this case I think that loadbios must be moved to a separate module. Not for microkernel or something. Just loadbios will also be used to boot multiboot kernels and perhaps bsd too. Also if EFI-related functions are moved to a separate module then i386/efi/linux.c can be merged to i386/linux.c (I'm also working on this)
-- Regards Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |