[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: moving ata initialisation to a command
From: |
Robert Millan |
Subject: |
Re: moving ata initialisation to a command |
Date: |
Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:04:05 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 05:47:36PM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
> Robert Millan <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 01:26:31PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 17:01 +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
> >> > A better solution, IMO, would be changing grub-mkrescue so it doesn't
> >> > load all modules.
> >>
> >> Maybe grub-mkrescue should create a filesystem? Even FAT should be
> >> fine. This way, it will be possible to load problematic modules from
> >> the filesystem. The only problem would be dependency on filesystem
> >> making tools. Fortunately, mtools is quite common.
> >
> > I'd prefer to support embedding filesystems in core.img instead. This
> > solves the problem for every situation instead of just PC boot media
> > (e.g. LinuxBIOS ELF payload image).
>
> Agreed, I would like to see such feature. Also for stuff like
> diskless boot.
>
> What I had in mind was the following. We could perhaps make it
> possible to add all files using grub-mkimage, not only modules. When
> you add modules, those will be loaded automatically. All other files
> will be ignored.
>
> Another filesystem module has to be written. It scans over these
> files and will make them available. This can be simple and elegant.
> I do not like the idea of adding a diskimage or so. Are you
> interested in working on this?
Well, I already have an almost-working implementation. I guess I'll have to
defend it then! :-P
Really, it's clean and elegant. Very simple and flexible. Once I get the
address detection right, that is..
> > Anyway, as long as root privileges aren't made necessary, I'm fine with
> > grub-mkrescue creating a filesystem (one saner than FAT, preferably ;-).
>
> Great! Will you do that? :-)
No, I tried once and it was a mess of things. Besides, when we have embedded
filesystem support this won't add any real advantage.
--
Robert Millan
<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)
- Re: moving ata initialisation to a command, (continued)
- Re: moving ata initialisation to a command, Christian Franke, 2007/12/16
- Re: moving ata initialisation to a command, Vesa Jääskeläinen, 2007/12/16
- Re: moving ata initialisation to a command, Marco Gerards, 2007/12/17
- Re: moving ata initialisation to a command, Pavel Roskin, 2007/12/17
- Re: moving ata initialisation to a command, Robert Millan, 2007/12/20
- Re: moving ata initialisation to a command, Marco Gerards, 2007/12/21
- Re: moving ata initialisation to a command,
Robert Millan <=
- embedding filesystems in core image (Re: moving ata initialisation to a command), Robert Millan, 2007/12/21
- Re: embedding filesystems in core image (Re: moving ata initialisation to a command), Bean, 2007/12/21
- Re: embedding filesystems in core image (Re: moving ata initialisation to a command), Robert Millan, 2007/12/22
- Re: embedding filesystems in core image (Re: moving ata initialisation to a command), Yoshinori K. Okuji, 2007/12/22
- Re: embedding filesystems in core image (Re: moving ata initialisation to a command), Robert Millan, 2007/12/23
- Re: embedding filesystems in core image (Re: moving ata initialisation to a command), Bean, 2007/12/24
- Re: embedding filesystems in core image (Re: moving ata initialisation to a command), Robert Millan, 2007/12/24
- Re: embedding filesystems in core image (Re: moving ata initialisation to a command), Bean, 2007/12/24
- Re: embedding filesystems in core image (Re: moving ata initialisation to a command), Robert Millan, 2007/12/24
- Re: embedding filesystems in core image (Re: moving ata initialisation to a command), Bean, 2007/12/24