Re: Ext2fs patch

[M. Gerards]

Quoting "Yoshinori K. Okuji" <address@hidden>:

> On Monday 27 October 2003 20:25, Marco Gerards wrote:
> > Here is, as I have promised, the ext2fs patch.  This patch also
> > changes the TODO and README files and fixes a bug in the partition
> > handling.  Can you please have a look at how this bug was caused and
> > why linux_find_partition was used?
> 
> Don't change the address of bug reports. pupa-devel is a members-only list,
> so 
> not all people can post messages.

Sorry, I didn't know about this. How about changing the bug address to
bug-grub? I would like to see the bug reports so I don't have to run
into reported bugs. I can also fix some bugs if I know about them.

> Don't remove linux_find_partition. It is necessary, at least on 2.4 or older.

Weird.  I'm using Linux 2.4 and after removing the function it worked
perfectly.  I will have a closer look at this code, but I had the idea
this code just does the same as the pupa/disks/i386 code.

> A comment should say the reason. If it doesn't work correctly, debug it 
> instead of getting rid of the whole function. Probably any bug related to the
> partition handling should be a wrong calculation of sector numbers. So attach
> gdb and take a look at which sectors PUPA will try to access.

The sector number is definitely wrong.
 
> If you don't implement triple indirects, use PUPA_ERR_NOT_IMPLEMENTED_YET 
> appropriately. PUPA should not fail silently.

I will do this.

> BTW, did you write ext2.c from scratch, without stealing code really? I'm 
> asking this, because ext2 is poorly documented so it is difficult to 
> implement ext2fs without seeing other code.

Yes, I completely wrote it from scratch. I have a book in which the
internals of ext2 are discussed. I also used some free documentation:

http://www.nongnu.org/ext2-doc/ext2.html

Are there any licensing problems with other parts of GRUB?

Thanks,
Marco