Re: [GITGRUB] New menu interface (implementation)

[Bean]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 5:10 PM, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Bean wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 5:12 AM, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> Bean wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Update:
>>>>
>>>> Add timeout, progressbar and savedefault.
>>>>
>>>> savedefault:
>>>>
>>>> Variable savedefault set the system default value. If savedefault=1,
>>>> save the current boot item.
>>>>
>>>> You can also overwrite the default value for individual items, in
>>>> menuentry statement --save option always save this item, and --nosave
>>>> never save the item. If neither --save nor --nosave is specified, the
>>>> system default in savedefault variable is checked.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Why do you need this over having a normal save_env? I don't see any
>>> reason to prefer an ad-hoc here over general solution
>>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is more convenient than adding a save_env command to every entry.
>> Users can just set savedefault=1 and all items are saved by default,
>> remove it and it's not saved anymore. They can also config each item
>> individually with --save and --nosave option, which is similar to
>> adding a save_env command at the beginning, but easier to edit.
>>
>>
> It may be more convinient in this case but when you start adding ad-hoc
> structures to any programming languages you end up only clobbering it.
> This is why a simple language C became more widespread than clobbered
> Ada. If you want to execute code on running entries you will need signals

Hi,

But menuentry statement is already changed for similar reason. Colin
adds --class option, you add --users option, why would add another
option --save and --nosave be any difference ?

BTW, the save_env method doesn't works menu items generated
dynamically. For example, the menu items added by osdetect.lua or sub
menu items by menu_create.

-- 
Bean

My repository: https://launchpad.net/burg