Syslinux - Nov 2003 - INCLUDE config command?

So instead of a series of files containing the same set of virtual
kernels and a distinct DEFAULT option (which is a lazy/safe way of
having one configuration per file), you'd have one main config file
INCLUDEd by the various instances files.


-first_config------------------       -main_config------------------
PROMPT 1                              PROMPT 1
DEFAULT l1                            TIMEOUT 40
TIMEOUT 40                            label l1
                                        kernel vmlinux
label l1                                append some_options
  kernel vmlinux                           
  append some_options                 label l2
                                        kernel vmlinux
label l2                                append some_different_options
  kernel vmlinux                      -------------------------------
  append some_different_options      
-------------------------------       -first_config------------------   
                                      INCLUDE main_config
-second_config-----------------       DEFAULT l1                     
PROMPT 1                              -------------------------------
DEFAULT l1                            
TIMEOUT 40                            -second_config-----------------
                                      INCLUDE main_config           
label l1                              DEFAULT l2                    
  kernel vmlinux                      -------------------------------
  append some_options

label l2
  kernel vmlinux
  append some_different_options
-------------------------------


I've had a look at getc.inc and presume that "Only one simultaneous use
is supported" is the sticking point for nested config files?

Regards,
Jonathan
-- 
                   
 Jonathan Sambrook 
Software  Developer 
 Designer  Servers

Jonathan Sambrook wrote:
> 
> I've had a look at getc.inc and presume that "Only one
simultaneous use
> is supported" is the sticking point for nested config files?
> 
Correct.

Note that you could do the equvalent by having a Makefile system and
preprocess them on the server.

	-hpa