Marc Singer wrote: > On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 09:02:33AM +0930, Rod Whitby wrote: >> Marc Singer wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 12:25:43AM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: >>>> * Marc Singer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-08-13 12:44]: >>>>> All good. I flashed the image the way I flash any upgrade. Since >>>>> it booted, I believe it's all good. >>>> So, I can confirm that it also works for me. I've booted both into >>>> debian-installer and into a Debian system, and I also tested a kernel >>>> which is bigger than 1 MB. :-) >>>> >>>> I noticed that APEX loads everything from a FIS partition into memory. >>>> Maybe it would be possible to honour the size entry from the Sercom >>>> header, but I don't think this is terribly important. >> APEX should honour the data size entry in the FIS directory, which >> should be correctly written by slugimage. The SerComm header is only >> there for compatibility with the Linksys/SerComm hacked up RedBoot. > > That's what I do, the FIS data and skip the SERCOMM headers. I > suggested that we abolish the SERCOMM header on the initrd, but Martin > doesn't like that idea. Considering that nothing can load our > modified firmware except for APEX, there doesn't seem to be much > reason to keep the SERCOMM header on the initrd. It does mean that > slugimage would need a little more work. Does't matter to me either > way.
It was my request that the FIS partition which starts at the Linksys RamDisk location contains a valid SerComm header (just like the first kernel partition). As for subsequent partitions, I see no reason to put a SerComm header on them. So an APEX-managed flash image has the same number of SerComm headers in the same locations as a standard Linksys flash image. That's all I'm asking for. I'd prefer that there were no other SerComm headers added to any other partitions. -- Rod -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
