On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:40:06PM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Christophe Fergeau > <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 05:18:43AM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > >> From: "Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeeshanak@xxxxxxxxx> > >> diff --git a/osinfo/osinfo_install_script.h b/osinfo/osinfo_install_script.h > >> index d91751e..82486ef 100644 > >> --- a/osinfo/osinfo_install_script.h > >> +++ b/osinfo/osinfo_install_script.h > >> @@ -163,6 +165,9 @@ OsinfoPathFormat osinfo_install_script_get_path_format(OsinfoInstallScript *scri > >> gboolean osinfo_install_script_get_can_pre_install_drivers(OsinfoInstallScript *script); > >> gboolean osinfo_install_script_get_can_post_install_drivers(OsinfoInstallScript *script); > >> > >> +OsinfoDeviceDriverFormat osinfo_install_script_get_pre_install_driver_format(OsinfoInstallScript *script); > >> +OsinfoDeviceDriverFormat osinfo_install_script_get_post_install_driver_format(OsinfoInstallScript *script); > > > > I don't think assuming that a given installer will support only one driver > > format is expressive enough. For Windows post-install drivers, supporting > > unpacked Windows drivers in addition to running a .exe shouldn't be very > > hard, and this API would not work there. > > I see you point. I can make it a list. Would that be good? I think so. Though concretely why do we need to expose this information? In all cases user of this information will need to drop it to a disk image which will be passed to the VM, no? Christophe
Attachment:
pgpR9x78M663C.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
