Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 07:44:07 -0700 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: boot block differences between 4.x and 6.x ? Message-ID: <43DF77B7.4050800@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <20060131061812.A53329@xorpc.icir.org> References: <20060131061812.A53329@xorpc.icir.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Luigi Rizzo wrote: > maybe some of you know the answer here... > > the revised picobsd script (attached here, it uses > sysutils/makefs instead of vnconfig/mdconfig so it can > run as a non privileged user) that i was using to > create images with the 4.11 boot blocks (boot1 and boot2), > does not seem to work anymore with the boot blocks > taken from 6.0 (and so, -current as well). > > When i force it to use the 4.x boot blocks, all is fine, > and the picobsd.bin produced (built on 6.0 using 7-current > sources) boots fine on qemu. > > I am a bit puzzled on what could be the relevant change in boot1/boot2 > could have caused the loss of functionality. > > If that matters, picobsd bypasses /boot/loader and goes straight > to boot /kernel (the name is patched into the boot block, > but it does not matter because the new blocks do not > even get to the point of showing the 'missing /boot/loader' > error message). > > does anyone know where should i look at ? > > thanks > luigi > The big difference is that the boot blocks grew significantly to support UFS2. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43DF77B7.4050800>