Hello Syslinux ML,>From menu.txt:[quote] # Return to the main menu LABEL mainmenu MENU LABEL Return to Main Menu KERNEL vesamenu.c32 APPEND graphics.conf ~ [/quote] The following example shows 3 (levels of) cfg files (instead of 2 as in menu.txt). *** 1.cfg start *** # go to 2.cfg LABEL 2_lab COM32 menu.c32 APPEND graphics.cfg 2.cfg *** 1.cfg end *** *** 2.cfg start *** # go back to respective "main" cfg LABEL 2main_lab COM32 menu.c32 APPEND graphics.cfg ~ # go to 3.cfg LABEL 3_lab COM32 menu.c32 APPEND graphics.cfg 3.cfg *** 2.cfg end *** *** 3.cfg start *** # go back to respective "main" cfg LABEL 3main_lab COM32 menu.c32 APPEND graphics.cfg ~ *** 3.cfg end *** By selecting 3main_lab we jump back to the initial ("main") 1.cfg. This would achieve a similar effect as "menu goto .top" when using submenus. Is there any way to achieve a generic "go to the next higher menu" (2.cfg in the example regarding 3.cfg) (which would be an equivalent to "MENU EXIT" when using submenus)? Although I hope to be wrong, my guess is that there is no equivalent to "menu exit" when not using submenus. But maybe some different syntax in 2.cfg and/or 3.cfg could achieve the same "go to the next higher menu" effect? Any ideas are appreciated. TIA, Ady.
On 02/22/2013 08:23 PM, Ady wrote:> > Although I hope to be wrong, my guess is that there is no equivalent > to "menu exit" when not using submenus. But maybe some different > syntax in 2.cfg and/or 3.cfg could achieve the same "go to the next > higher menu" effect? > > Any ideas are appreciated. >Calling menu.c32 is a GOTO, no history is retained. It is also very inefficient, use proper submenus instead... -hpa
> On 02/22/2013 08:23 PM, Ady wrote: > > > > Although I hope to be wrong, my guess is that there is no equivalent > > to "menu exit" when not using submenus. But maybe some different > > syntax in 2.cfg and/or 3.cfg could achieve the same "go to the next > > higher menu" effect? > > > > Any ideas are appreciated. > > > > Calling menu.c32 is a GOTO, no history is retained. > > It is also very inefficient, use proper submenus instead... > > -hpaThank you for your answer. Could you please clarify in which sense it is very inefficient? TIA, Ady.
On 02/25/2013 10:43 PM, Ady wrote:> >> On 02/22/2013 08:23 PM, Ady wrote: >>> >>> Although I hope to be wrong, my guess is that there is no equivalent >>> to "menu exit" when not using submenus. But maybe some different >>> syntax in 2.cfg and/or 3.cfg could achieve the same "go to the next >>> higher menu" effect? >>> >>> Any ideas are appreciated. >>> >> >> Calling menu.c32 is a GOTO, no history is retained. >> >> It is also very inefficient, use proper submenus instead... >> >> -hpa > > Thank you for your answer. > > Could you please clarify in which sense it is very inefficient? >It reloads the menu module from disk/network every time. -hpa