Re: patch - debug X

[Jim Cromie]

Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:

> On Friday 07 November 2003 23:58, Jim Cromie wrote:
>  
>
> > patch.debug:
> >    changes builtin-debug to take an optional numeric argument,
> >    and sets accordingly.  Argumentless form still toggles.
> >    
>
> Why do you need this change? I don't see why the command "debug" is useful in 
> a menu entry.
>  

um, from a newbies standpoint, it helps to see the steps echoed to the 
console.
It also follows principle of least surpise - that a provided argument 
would do something,
rather than be silently disregarded. 

And whether it is used from a menu-entry or from the command-line is fairly
independent from the argument/argumentless issue.  A user could 
reasonably expect
debug 1 to turn it on from the command-line, even if it was already on.

Finally - it opens the interface for debug levels:  debug 2, debug 3, 
etc, without
guaranteeing that theyre meaningful for any particular builtin.

But I must hedge a bit....

As Ive come to understand (better, but not fully) since, it doesnt mean 
that
the commands are run; that depends on the flags.  In particular, my 
setdefault X
patch (and my unposted try-in-progress at savedefault X) was missing
this snippet from  Carlo Contavalli's <ccontavalli at commedia.it> version

savedefault_func (char *arg, int flags)
.... 
-  /* This command is only useful when you boot an entry from the menu
-     interface.  */
-  if (! (flags & BUILTIN_SCRIPT))
+  if(*arg)


FWIW - I was also trying to add a grub-debug=blah,blah,blah to the 
kernel arg-list,
so that it would show up in the boot-log.  That stalled out for lack of 
sufficient understanding,
but im curious if that would be regarded as an ugly hack.

> > patch.quit:
> >    I got annoyed at the error when I do grub> q <enter>,
> >    enough to try to fix it.
> >    
>
> I don't like such a change.

ok - its not that annoying :-)

> Thanks,
> Okuji
>
> .
>
>  
no, thank *you*
jimc