Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> writes:
> Hello,
>
> Philip Hands, on lun. 13 févr. 2017 11:16:19 +0100, wrote:
>> Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> writes:
>> > On Sun, 2017-02-12 at 12:26 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> >> Just wondering: can't we just always do both? I.e. remove the varnodot
>> >> check. Sure that's ugly because then we have both the commandline and
>> >> the module, but to me it's the least horrifying solution. And AIUI
>> >> that'd actually be needed if for instance with a new kernel release a
>> >> driver gets migrated from compiled-in to loadable module or vice-versa.
>> >
>> > I agree that the current check is incorrect and should be removed.
>> > It's been possible for a long time to have dotted parameters for built-
>> > in code, whether or not that code could ever be built as a module.
>> >
>> >> So, does it look too ugly?
>> >
>> > It is ugly that we will still end up writing module parameters for non-
>> > existent modules.
>>
>> Well, there are only about ten of these prefixes at present AFAICT:
> [...]
>> so we could maintain a list of known non-module prefixes to filter the
>> options by. As long as we catch the commonly used ones, that's fine as
>> it doesn't really matter if the list is not complete, since then we fall
>> back to being a bit ugly.
>
> That looks good to me. Anything against this solution?
I think these changes should do the trick:
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/d-i/rootskel.git/log/?h=pu/bug-853855
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/d-i/debian-installer-utils.git/log/?h=pu/bug-853855
rootskel: I separated that into two commits (13c865dc & 4f8e64c1) to
make it more obvious what I did.
di-utils: I've just removed the check for dots, so that they should then
get included in the target's kernel command line
I'll try to sort out some tests for that later (jenkins just failed to
build an image for some reason).
Cheers, Phil.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature