Re: [PATCH 01/11] Fix base64 module to work with grub codebase

[Daniel Kiper]

Bumping the thread... Please take a look below...

On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 05:24:31PM +0100, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> CC-ing Vladimir...
>
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 02:34:25PM -0500, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> > Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> writes:
> > > On 10/28/21 12:32, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> > >
> > >> I don't know why Patrick chose to
> > >> not use that instead, but a local test seems to work.
> > >
> > > Is grub2 intended to be portable to compilers that don't support
> > > <stdbool.h>? If that's the issue, I suggest that grub2 stop worrying
> > > that. Surely every compiler of interest to grub2 supports <stdbool.h>
> > > already. And if you really need to support older compilers, the Gnulib
> > > stdbool module should suffice.
> > >
> > >> grub2 shims out config.h for some build targets (e.g., when not building
> > >> utilities).
> > >
> > > Why does it need to do that? Is this because of cross-building, and
> > > where <config.h> is for the utilities platform which is not the same as
> > > the target platform? If so, that suggests that you should run two
> > > 'configure' instances, one for the utilities and one for the target, and
> > > compile the base64 module twice if it's used in both places.
> >
> > I'll defer to Daniel on why things are the way they are, but I don't
> > disagree with you.
>
> Vladimir told me once we are doing that because otherwise we would be
> leaking too many "OS specific things" into the GRUB core and modules
> which run on top firmware/bare metal instead of the OS. I hope he will
> be able to tell us more here...
>
> Vladimir?

Vladimir, could you give us examples of leaks?

Daniel