Commited
phcoder wrote:
On the IRC Yoshinori K. Okuji agreed that this move can be useful in
cases like lvm+raid and luks. Any further oppositions?
phcoder wrote:
I was thinking about something more finished like the possibility of
handling multiple preboot and to undo the operations in case of
On the IRC Yoshinori K. Okuji agreed that this move can be useful in
cases like lvm+raid and luks. Any further oppositions?
phcoder wrote:
I was thinking about something more finished like the possibility of
handling multiple preboot and to undo the operations in case of failed
or returned boot
I was thinking about something more finished like the possibility of
handling multiple preboot and to undo the operations in case of failed
or returned boot. Potentially it could be moved to a separate module but
it results in a reverse dependency and somewhat ugly code
Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
phcoder wrote:
> This usage case isn't the main target case. If you embed the loader
> (which tend to be quite big) then you already have an overhead from
> loader module. Why are you so concerned with overhead of boot.mod?
> But on the other hand this forces all the people in other cases to have
>
This usage case isn't the main target case. If you embed the loader
(which tend to be quite big) then you already have an overhead from
loader module. Why are you so concerned with overhead of boot.mod?
But on the other hand this forces all the people in other cases to have
boot code in core.img
On Wednesday 01 April 2009 23:19:32 Robert Millan wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 10:52:26PM +0900, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> > On Tuesday 31 March 2009 17:56:24 phcoder wrote:
> > > With a new swing in normal.mod splitting I think we should reconsider
> > > this patch. It's useless to keep load
On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 10:52:26PM +0900, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> On Tuesday 31 March 2009 17:56:24 phcoder wrote:
> > With a new swing in normal.mod splitting I think we should reconsider
> > this patch. It's useless to keep loader.c in kernel without boot
> > command. IMO it should be moved e
On Tuesday 31 March 2009 17:56:24 phcoder wrote:
> With a new swing in normal.mod splitting I think we should reconsider
> this patch. It's useless to keep loader.c in kernel without boot
> command. IMO it should be moved either to a perate boot.mod (my
> preference) or to minicmd.mod (not a good o
With a new swing in normal.mod splitting I think we should reconsider
this patch. It's useless to keep loader.c in kernel without boot
command. IMO it should be moved either to a perate boot.mod (my
preference) or to minicmd.mod (not a good option IMO)
phcoder wrote:
Hello. Now when boot comman
On Sunday 22 March 2009 23:19:09 phcoder wrote:
> Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> > On Sunday 22 March 2009 22:30:24 phcoder wrote:
> >> Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> >>> On Sunday 22 March 2009 22:06:36 phcoder wrote:
> Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> > On Sunday 22 March 2009 21:48:21 phcoder wrot
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:01:41PM +0900, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> >
> > If it's unable to read FS then it can't boot much anyway. If it's it can
> > load modules from its own partition. The only use I see is when grub
> > partition is corrupted but OS one is intact and you already have FS
> > d
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
On Sunday 22 March 2009 22:30:24 phcoder wrote:
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
On Sunday 22 March 2009 22:06:36 phcoder wrote:
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
On Sunday 22 March 2009 21:48:21 phcoder wrote:
Hello. Now when boot command isn't in kernel anymore I don't see why
l
On Sunday 22 March 2009 22:30:24 phcoder wrote:
> Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> > On Sunday 22 March 2009 22:06:36 phcoder wrote:
> >> Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> >>> On Sunday 22 March 2009 21:48:21 phcoder wrote:
> Hello. Now when boot command isn't in kernel anymore I don't see why
> loa
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
On Sunday 22 March 2009 22:06:36 phcoder wrote:
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
On Sunday 22 March 2009 21:48:21 phcoder wrote:
Hello. Now when boot command isn't in kernel anymore I don't see why
loader.c stays in kernel. Here is the patch to move it to boot.mod
This is n
On Sunday 22 March 2009 22:06:36 phcoder wrote:
> Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> > On Sunday 22 March 2009 21:48:21 phcoder wrote:
> >> Hello. Now when boot command isn't in kernel anymore I don't see why
> >> loader.c stays in kernel. Here is the patch to move it to boot.mod
> >
> > This is not usefu
Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
On Sunday 22 March 2009 21:48:21 phcoder wrote:
Hello. Now when boot command isn't in kernel anymore I don't see why
loader.c stays in kernel. Here is the patch to move it to boot.mod
This is not useful in reality, because the loader interface needs to be
pre-loaded
On Sunday 22 March 2009 21:48:21 phcoder wrote:
> Hello. Now when boot command isn't in kernel anymore I don't see why
> loader.c stays in kernel. Here is the patch to move it to boot.mod
This is not useful in reality, because the loader interface needs to be
pre-loaded into core.img anyway. Note
Hello. Now when boot command isn't in kernel anymore I don't see why
loader.c stays in kernel. Here is the patch to move it to boot.mod
2009-03-22 Vladimir Serbinenko
Move loader out of the kernel
* kern/loader.c: moved to ...
* commands/boot.c: ... moved here
18 matches
Mail list logo
