Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 00:06:42 +0200 (SAT) From: Robert Nordier <rnordier@nordier.com> To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: netboot & ELF kernels Message-ID: <199901132206.AAA00700@ceia.nordier.com> In-Reply-To: <199901131708.JAA29927@whistle.com> from Doug Ambrisko at "Jan 13, 99 09:08:43 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug Ambrisko wrote: > Robert Nordier writes: > | Bjoern Fischer wrote: > | > | > I've recently noticed that ELF is now default on a > | > kernel build. No problems with ELF kernels on a server > | > machine, but netboot fails to load an ELF kernel (lack > | > of support, it seems). > | > > | > Is it on the list to add support for ELF kernels to > | > netboot? Or, is there any alternative way to boot > | > a diskless machine (diskless -- not even a floppy)? > | > | One alternative is Etherboot (http://www.slug.org.au) which Doug > | Ambrisko <ambrisko@whistle.com> has patched for FreeBSD and which > | will most likely be added to the ports collection. > | > | I've been sitting on this for some time (sorry, Doug), but will > | try to finish looking at it in the next few days. > > I've been meaning to ask you about them. I know they are not perfect > but something is better then nothing! Hopefully some other people > can work on making it better once the port is made. The complicated > part is that it depends on the linux-devel package and a slight change. > What I did was replace the linux ld with a perl script to run brandelf > linux after the ld was done. This was due to the Etherboot package > creating static bins that are required during the build process. Having spent some time with this stuff already, I'd certainly recommend that people look at it as a potential FreeBSD netboot replacement. > If I should send it to someone else to look at I can or maybe I can get > Julian or Archie to add it. There are probably two perspectives involved. I've been particularly interested in what you sent from the point of view of the new boot code project, and how it can fit in to satisfy netbooting requirements generally. But the ports issue is really much simpler -- does it work? is it useful? (obviously yes) -- so there's really not any reason to delay committing it. As the ports collection tends to have its own special set of rules and conventions, the quickest route may be to submit the usual PR, allowing any of the ports specialist committers to check and commit the files. -- Robert Nordier To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901132206.AAA00700>