Messages in this thread | | | Date | 02 Aug 2002 20:33:00 +0200 | From | (Kai Henningsen) | Subject | Re: 2.5.28 and partitions |
| |
pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil (Jesse Pollard) wrote on 02.08.02 in <200208021454.JAA37529@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>:
> kaih@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen): > ... > > As for finding where to boot from - either have the bootloader define a > > partition name it wants to see, or put the relevant name into the boot > > loader config. No need to define that in the partition format. That's > > trivial: even MS-DOS did that (finding IO.SYS and MSDOS.SYS from the boot > > loader)! And neither scanning for '=' and '\n' nor comparing one string > > nor converting one number from decimal is any kind of hardship. Maybe half > > a screen of assembler, tops. > > > > Nope. > > The problem is different - which file system is the file stored in?
Huh?! What file?!
> How many different filesystems are there?
That's not a question for the bootloader.
> Do think all of them will fit in a boot loader?
Who cares? You can always give it a partition of its own. (The example did exactly that!)
> Or even one of them? > How many different logical volume structures are there?
I have no idea what you are talking about here.
> Do do this you first have to convince the development people to say that > "only xxxx filesystem shall be bootable".
Utter nonsense.
> And now, you also have to add possible logical volumes on top (or under :) > of it.
What are you babbling about?
> That is why LILO doesn't use file names for boots. It only uses block > numbers.
So?
(By the way, it's the *only* boot loader I know that does this.)
> Another alternative (possibly just as hard) is to have LILO only > load a more complex and dynamic loader, which could be configured for > each filesystem structure. Once that "dynamic loader" is loaded, it > could find and load the kernel (passing, of course, the boot command line > from LILO).
What on earth does that have to do with the format of a partition table?!
> I know IRIX gets around the problem by having a tiny filesystem for the > "disk label". This filesystem contains only contigeous files, and has
Around *which* problem?! That's certainly something that's only relevant after the bootloader is long gone.
Frankly, I have no idea what you're smoking, but it can't be healthy.
MfG Kai - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |