- User Since
- Jun 2 2014, 4:20 PM (263 w, 18 h)
Looks OK to me. One possible nit
Sun, Jun 16
Sat, Jun 15
Thu, Jun 13
I've not looked deeply into this, but it seems to my limited understanding in the right direction, though I'll defer to hps@ should his opinion differ.
Just noted a couple of nits, plus there's some minor style issues with some of the code that we can get into once other comments are made to the source.
Wed, Jun 12
yea, this never should have been in boot_module.h to start with.
Tue, Jun 11
Mon, Jun 10
Sat, Jun 8
Added emaste as a sanity check for the 'not used' bit. I'd like to see this die in fire.
Fri, Jun 7
Thu, Jun 6
Wed, Jun 5
I'd just roll with this. IMHO, the simplicity trumps the other patterns in the file because using the pattern here gives no real benefit.
bootools is a terrible name, so bad I'm ticking 'request changes'.
Tue, Jun 4
Mon, Jun 3
This change should do what it says it will do.
Let's see if we can get a bunch of 'works for me' reports from testers :)
It's never needed it
On second thought, I'll use the tunable.
I think this is good, thought I thought'd I'd committed the PARTWILD stuff already. Are there more places I/we've missed?
Sun, Jun 2
Sat, Jun 1
Fri, May 31
Remove now-obsolete comment.
Fix per ed (though a little different construct)
Fix backwards test after converting from -z notation...
Plug more holes with tips from kib, jhb and markj.
Try a little harder, add comments.