- Original Message
From: Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: The development of GRUB 2
Sent: Thursday, 4 September, 2008 11:07:46 PM
Subject: Re: Windows,grub and grub2
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 1:01 AM, Viswesh S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message
> From: Bean <[EMAI
On Monday 08 September 2008 9:26:54 pm Greg White wrote:
> >As far as I know, the "root=" line is passed as one of the parameters to
> >the booting kernel, so it shouldn't matter what version of Grub you're
> >using. For instance, if you're running Linux, look at the Linux kernel
> >documentation
>As far as I know, the "root=" line is passed as one of the parameters to
>the booting kernel, so it shouldn't matter what version of Grub you're
>using. For instance, if you're running Linux, look at the Linux kernel
>documentation for the kernel in /Documentation/kernel-paraemeters.txt --
>
>As far as I know, the "root=" line is passed as one of the parameters to
>the booting kernel, so it shouldn't matter what version of Grub you're
>using. For instance, if you're running Linux, look at the Linux kernel
>documentation for the kernel in /Documentation/kernel-paraemeters.txt --
>
Hello. I had conflicts in .mk files after "svn up" so I removed all the
.mk. common.mk and i386-pc.mk were regenerated correctly but not i386.mk
$ make
conf/i386-pc.mk:3394: conf/i386.mk: No such file or directory
make: *** No rule to make target `conf/i386.mk'. Stop.
Can someone familiar with bui
Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 08:27:05PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
>> Robert Millan wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:54:43PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
BTW GPT module checks the protective MBR. In some cases when legay OS
modified the MBR it's no longer "protective MBR". And
Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 08:27:05PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
>> Robert Millan wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:54:43PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
BTW GPT module checks the protective MBR. In some cases when legay OS
modified the MBR it's no longer "protective MBR". And
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 12:02:30AM +0200, Felix Zielcke wrote:
> There seems to be now a increased git interest floating around ;)
Gah, no that was just me porting a program to Multiboot, which happened to
be hosted on git ;-)
> So I think just ditching the old method completely and just dependin
Am Donnerstag, den 04.09.2008, 20:21 +0200 schrieb Felix Zielcke:
> I think also that the SVN approach would be the better one.
> Shouldn't be too hard to replace that `make
> dist'/DISTLIST/gendistlist.sh stuff with a small script which uses SVN
> for this.
I played now a bit with `git-svn' and
El lun, 08-09-2008 a las 23:25 +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen escribió:
> Javier Martín wrote:
> > El lun, 08-09-2008 a las 22:48 +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen escribió:
> >> phcoder wrote:
> >>> Hello. As I said in another email there is no need for it. I send a
> >>> patch for it.
> >> Doesn't this break ou
Javier Martín wrote:
> El lun, 08-09-2008 a las 22:48 +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen escribió:
>> phcoder wrote:
>>> Hello. As I said in another email there is no need for it. I send a
>>> patch for it.
>> Doesn't this break our rescue mode ?
> How would it? As with other commands, there would be two ver
El lun, 08-09-2008 a las 22:48 +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen escribió:
> phcoder wrote:
> > Hello. As I said in another email there is no need for it. I send a
> > patch for it.
>
> Doesn't this break our rescue mode ?
How would it? As with other commands, there would be two versions of it,
one for res
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 04:48:29PM +, Jonathan A. Kollasch wrote:
> hi,
>
> Robert noted that I should mention this:
>
> The ELF section header table MBI seems to not be implemented in grub2.
> NetBSD/i386 uses this to find symbol names in it's kernel debugger.
For the record (Jonathan alrea
phcoder wrote:
> Hello. As I said in another email there is no need for it. I send a
> patch for it.
Doesn't this break our rescue mode ?
___
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 20:29 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> Though, for grub-emu the problem you describe is not significant, since the
> BIOS isn't there to missbehave. Perhaps we could make i386-pc's grub-emu
> use "grub_halt (void)" instead?
Fine with me. If somebody really needs "--no-apm" (w
Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 06:17:34PM +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
>> Robert Millan wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:49:02AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
Quoting Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
>>
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 08:27:05PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:54:43PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
> >> BTW GPT module checks the protective MBR. In some cases when legay OS
> >> modified the MBR it's no longer "protective MBR". And in theese cases
> >> GRU
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 12:58:57PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 16:11 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm confused as to what "halt --no-apm" could be useful for. The code in
> > startup.S seems to check for APM before using it. Is there any reason why
> > users
Robert Millan wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:54:43PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
>> BTW GPT module checks the protective MBR. In some cases when legay OS
>> modified the MBR it's no longer "protective MBR". And in theese cases
>> GRUB will refuse to boot. Isn't the magic number check enough?
>
> If
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 06:17:34PM +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:49:02AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> >> Quoting Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>
> >>> This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
> >> Why i386? That code
On Monday 08 September 2008 12:02:27 pm Greg White wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if support for root=label= is coming to grub anytime soon?
> I found someone who wrote a patch that did this back in 2004
> (http://osdir.com/ml/boot-loaders.grub.bugs/2004-02/msg00105.html). I
> really need a way
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 16:11 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm confused as to what "halt --no-apm" could be useful for. The code in
> startup.S seems to check for APM before using it. Is there any reason why
> users would want an infin loop even when power-off is possible?
I guess the in
Felix Zielcke wrote on 20080903:
> could you please address Marco's issues and send a new patch so the
> topic is brought up again?
Yes, I'll make some time for it.
regards,
Hans Lambermont
--
Hans Lambermont, M.Sc. - Newtec - OS-Platform&VAS
http://newtec.eu/t:+31408519234m:+316
Hi,
I was wondering if support for root=label= is coming to grub anytime soon? I
found someone who wrote a patch that did this back in 2004
(http://osdir.com/ml/boot-loaders.grub.bugs/2004-02/msg00105.html). I really
need a way to do root=label WITHOUT an initrd. I have a portable USB hard
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 17:09 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:49:02AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > Quoting Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > >
> > >This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
> >
> > Why i386? That code is not i386 specific.
>
> I
Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 08:12:02PM +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> As our release plan is rotting a bit, I zapped current plan on Wiki and
>> here is my proposal for plan targetting 2.0 gold release.
>>
>> == 1.97 ==
>>
>> Estimate Date:: 2008-??-?? (ASAP)
Robert Millan wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:49:02AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
>> Quoting Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>> This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
>> Why i386? That code is not i386 specific.
>
> It is. Notice it's being moved from conf/i386-*.rmk
On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 08:12:02PM +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> As our release plan is rotting a bit, I zapped current plan on Wiki and
> here is my proposal for plan targetting 2.0 gold release.
>
> == 1.97 ==
>
> Estimate Date:: 2008-??-?? (ASAP)
>
> Release Focus:: Gener
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:49:02AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Quoting Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >
> >This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
>
> Why i386? That code is not i386 specific.
It is. Notice it's being moved from conf/i386-*.rmk, not common.rmk.
norm
Pavel Roskin wrote:
> I believe we could declare SPARC broken, but keep PowerPC working. The
> PowerPC code can be cross-compiled and tested in qemu. I can send my
> testing scripts if you want.
Can you put that on Wiki?
___
Grub-devel mailing list
G
Quoting Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
Why i386? That code is not i386 specific. Cannot we call it common2
or something like that?
I believe we could declare SPARC broken, but keep PowerPC working.
The PowerPC code can be
Hi,
I'm confused as to what "halt --no-apm" could be useful for. The code in
startup.S seems to check for APM before using it. Is there any reason why
users would want an infin loop even when power-off is possible?
Unfortunately it makes grub_halt() and all the code surrounding it less
portabl
This patch moves normal, serial and pci to conf/i386.rmk.
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."
200
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 09:21:30PM +0800, Bean wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2008-09-01 Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * disk/ata.c (grub_apapi_open): Initialize devfnd, no need to set
> scsi->name and scsi->luns, as they will be set in grub_scsi_open.
>
> * disk/scsi.c (grub_scsi_open): Do
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 10:06:40PM +0300, Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 02:07:08PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> >> On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 18:49 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I think we discussed before about util/biosdisk.c being a co
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:54:43PM +0200, phcoder wrote:
> BTW GPT module checks the protective MBR. In some cases when legay OS
> modified the MBR it's no longer "protective MBR". And in theese cases
> GRUB will refuse to boot. Isn't the magic number check enough?
If there's at least one protecti
36 matches
Mail list logo
