From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38932) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1czRIt-0003NG-Uq for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Apr 2017 13:16:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1czRIp-0003JY-0P for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Apr 2017 13:16:07 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:51048) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1czRIo-0003JD-RX for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Apr 2017 13:16:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1czRIo-0007XI-DY for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Apr 2017 13:16:02 -0400 Subject: bug#26339: [PATCH 04/18] bootloader: Add install procedures and use them. Resent-Message-ID: References: <20170402135242.2958-1-m.othacehe@gmail.com> <20170402135242.2958-4-m.othacehe@gmail.com> <20170415182222.3e1cef0e@scratchpost.org> From: Mathieu Othacehe In-reply-to: <20170415182222.3e1cef0e@scratchpost.org> Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2017 19:15:46 +0200 Message-ID: <8760i5iocd.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Danny Milosavljevic Cc: 26339@debbugs.gnu.org > Is that safe? Will there only be one bootloader configuration at all times? What if the user uses multiple "guix system"s on the same machine? Well you can have only one bootloader in MBR at a time, so even if you have multiple system generations with various bootloaders, only one is installed. But I might be wrong here ... >> + dd > > Errrr... was that exported on purpose? Sounds very implementation-detaily to me. Yes you're right, no need to export dd. > Rather #:bootloader-installer or #:bootloader-installation ? Or leave it as is, doesn't matter much, I guess. I think a non-substantive for this is strange. #:bootloader-installer seems fine, I'll update. > >> + #$(bootloader-configuration-install-procedure > > If it's not installing a procedure it should be bootloader-configuration-installation-procedure or bootloader-configuration-installer, I think. Ok for bootloader-configuration-installer then. > > Otherwise LGTM! Thanks, Mathieu