Re: {B,C}LFS State of Things (was Re: SVN-20070706: ...)

2007-07-21 Thread Bryan Kadzban
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Luca wrote: > Grub-0.9x is old Grub legacy and no-more maintained. According to their site, it is maintained, just no new features are being added. (Though I'm not sure what sense of the word "maintained" they're using then... but whatever. Pre

Re: {B,C}LFS State of Things (was Re: SVN-20070706: ...)

2007-07-21 Thread Joe Ciccone
Bryan Kadzban wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: RIPEMD160 > > Luca wrote: > >> Grub-0.9x is old Grub legacy and no-more maintained. >> > > According to their site, it is maintained, just no new features are > being added. (Though I'm not sure what sense of the word "maint

Re: {B,C}LFS State of Things (was Re: SVN-20070706: ...)

2007-07-21 Thread Luca
- Original Message - From: "Bryan Kadzban" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "LFS Developers Mailinglist" Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2007 2:49 PM Subject: Re: {B,C}LFS State of Things (was Re: SVN-20070706: ...) > According to their site, it is maintained, just no new features are > being added. (

Re: initramfs support

2007-07-21 Thread Alexander E. Patrakov
Bryan Kadzban wrote: > Not sure what the testing came up with, but I figured out a way to get > it to work: > Congratulations - you did more than Debian. They work only with /dev/md raids, not with named ones. > mkdir /dev/md > > for array in /dev/md[0-9]* ; do > # subshell so the $MD_* var

Re: initramfs support

2007-07-21 Thread Bryan Kadzban
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > Isn't /dev/md_$real_name normally a symlink to /dev/md/$real_name? I was thinking they were either copies or hardlinks. Let me fire up qemu again and check for sure, though. ...Nope, you're right, they're symlinks

Re: {B,C}LFS State of Things (was Re: SVN-20070706: ...)

2007-07-21 Thread Bryan Kadzban
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Joe Ciccone wrote: > Grub legacy sets up protected mode. ...Well never mind that then. Apparently the part of boot/setup.S in the kernel that I was reading isn't actually executed. Figures. :-P So it starts in protected mode, but (presumably)

Re: {B,C}LFS State of Things (was Re: SVN-20070706: ...)

2007-07-21 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Bryan Kadzban wrote: > Right. (Actually I'm not sure you can access more than 1MB of memory > even if you *do* pull your hair out. The memory model is 16-bit > segments and 16-bit offsets, but the physical address mapping is "shift > the segment number by 4 bits and add the offset" -- so the max