elilo multiboot support

Jeremy,

Jeremy Katz wrote:  [Mon Jun 26 2006, 03:21:18PM EDT]
> Overall, these look pretty good.  

Good to hear. 

> A few stylistic-ish things
> * The patches don't work individually -- applying them
in sequence ends
> up with some not compiling bits.  Was pretty easy to
fix up, but worth
> noting 

Thanks, and sorry for the inconvenience.

> * dprintf is already included in the standard library
as a GNU
> extension, but with a different functionality --
something like
> dbgprintf would be better just to avoid problems there

Okay

> * Instead of having the getLineByType2 thing, it would
probably be a
> little cleaner to just change the types to be a normal
int instead of an
> enum and then be able to determine matches via bitwise
operators

Heh, I wanted to do this but was already nervous about the
volume of
code being changed.  I agree it would be better.  I'll
change this for
the next submission.

> In the bigger realm, there seems to be a bug or two
lingering.  Running
> the test suite ('make test' from the toplevel) seems
to fail for
> x86/x86_64 with the patches applied -- it looks like
we're gaining an
> initrd in cases where it's unexpected (copy-default
shouldn't be copying
> the initrd, but it looks like it might be).  Also, it
looks like kernel
> arguments might be getting lost in the multiboot case. 
I'll try to look
> at this a little more later in the afternoon, but given
how the past two
> weeks have been "later in the afternoon"
could end up being Friday :/

I hadn't even noticed the existence of the test suite,
silly me.  
My testing had all been manual.  I'll run through the test
suite and
fix up the errors.

> Also, it'd be nice to have some test cases to add to
the test suite just
> so that we can more easily ensure that minor bugfixes
don't cause
> regressions.

Will do.  Thanks for the review.

Regards,
Aron
--
Fedora-xen mailing list
Fedora-xenredhat.com
ht
tps://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen