Nicholas Vinson <nvinson234@gmail.com> writes:
On 12/8/21 12:58, Robbie Harwood wrote:
Nicholas Vinson <nvinson234@gmail.com> writes:
On 12/7/21 15:04, Robbie Harwood wrote:
Nicholas Vinson <nvinson234@gmail.com> writes:
Wouldn't it be better to modify configure.ac so the location could
be passed in instead of having one-off patches for alternate
locations? Something like
--with-dejavu-font=/usr/share/fonts/dejavu-sans-fonts?
That would mean that anyone using grub2 that wants the dejavu fonts
will have to figure out that the option exists and pass it to the
buildscripts. That's a pretty bad user experience for anyone
building their own grub.
On the contrary, it doesn't have to mean that at all. It could mean
that when a path is given, configure would use the provided path;
otherwise, it falls back to its default list to find the font.
But then we still have to keep the default list... and I'd still be here
as a distro maintainer wanting my distro's path in the default list. I
don't see how this is any better.
And you want it in the default path because? Most likely because you're
patching configure or using tools like sed or awk to change configure or
Makefile to use your path? You know that approach is brittle and you
want something better.
No, that's not it. Don't put words in other people's mouths.
We're sitting on more than 220 downstream patches that I want
upstreamed. The relative brittleness of this particular change is
*nothing* in comparison, believe me :)
The sheer number here means I'm starting with the easy stuff. The
one-liners, simple conceptual things, *stuff that should be
non-contentious*.
Adding your distro's choice location to a pre-defined list works until
the distro changes where it stores the font. At that point you are back
where you started. Manually patching GRUB until a version of GRUB is
released with your new path in the list.
The same is true with any other distro that uses a location not in the
list. The approach you're suggesting is that submit a patch, get GRUB
updated.
What I am asking for puts an end to that. Once the flag is in place, the
builder can pick whatever path is desirable, pass it into the configure
script, and have GRUB builds. No need to craft a patch, send it to the
mailing list, and wait for the update to make it into a GRUB release.
But my point is this hurts everyone who's *not* the distro maintainer
but building their own grub. That's the user experience issue I was
talking about. Everyone developing on Fedora now has to remember
another flag or it won't work the same.
Such an approach would mimic configure's current behavior for values
such as bootdir and grubdir.
But those are *install* paths, not *detection* paths. We're not
installing the font - we're figuring out where it is on the system.
In the context of building GRUB, bootdir and grubdir are *not*
installation directories. They are simply default paths that get written
into the built code.
Right, that's what I mean by "install" path. It's a place where you put
stuff, not a place where you find stuff.
Effort is often times its own reward. I would not want to deprive you
of it.
Wow, okay.
You know this comes across as rather hostile, right? Is this really the >
approach you want to take when someone *shows up with code* and asks you
to clarify your feedback? Tell them to go away and RTFM?