On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 05:01:29AM +0800, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> FZ> If people want to have a timeout of 0 then they just can set it
> FZ> at /etc/default/grub
>
> But no timeout is different that a timeout of 0, isn't it?
> Does timeout=0 almost the same as timeout=999... or timeout=0.0
Am Samstag, den 30.08.2008, 05:01 +0800 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> FZ> please send patches upstream to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as I already told you.
> I thought I was changing a the Debian part, not the upstream part.
Then look at the source package, everything in /debian/ is debian
everything else i
FZ> please send patches upstream to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as I already told you.
I thought I was changing a the Debian part, not the upstream part.
FZ> If people want to have a timeout of 0 then they just can set it
FZ> at /etc/default/grub
But no timeout is different that a timeout of 0, isn't it?
Doe
Am Samstag, den 30.08.2008, 03:20 +0800 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> The following patches enable the user to avoid creating any timeout
> line in grub.cfg, without her/him needing to edit more than
> /etc/default/grub.
Please use `diff -u' format, i.e. unified instead of context.
and please send
Package: grub-pc
Version: 1.96+20080724-8
Severity: wishlist
File: /etc/default/grub
Tags: patch
The following patches enable the user to avoid creating any timeout
line in grub.cfg, without her/him needing to edit more than
/etc/default/grub.
*** /etc/grub.d/00_header 2008-08-18 22:44:45.0
5 matches
Mail list logo