Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 00:22:23 +0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Devin Teske <devin@shxd.cx> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Devin Teske <dteske@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Feedback on proposed loader changes Message-ID: <2f744512-6ed1-eebf-7dba-ddba2786d4de@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfqM4GRteQx1HqurKOxjS0Dg0CiuLgLLmoQwfZnucTbj4w@mail.gmail.com> References: <CANCZdfoF4M1k=wOzueg0KQk9tRoQT-hO0SrB51wxv=-n3ESiUw@mail.gmail.com> <5015.1517478674@critter.freebsd.dk> <E8FCC310-5401-43D1-85CB-6A59E64BFE63@shxd.cx> <CANCZdfqM4GRteQx1HqurKOxjS0Dg0CiuLgLLmoQwfZnucTbj4w@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2/2/18 1:59 am, Warner Losh wrote: > On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Devin Teske <devin@shxd.cx> wrote: > >> >>> On Feb 1, 2018, at 1:51 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> >> wrote: >>> -------- >>> In message <CANCZdfoF4M1k=wOzueg0KQk9tRoQT-hO0SrB51wxv=- >> n3ESiUw@mail.gmail.com>, Warner Losh writes: >>>> So I'd like feedback on two questions: Should I kill the forth features >> I >>>> oulined above? And should I make the build system build multiple loaders >>>> with a link controlling the default? >>> I think you should just move forward and go for the end-stage >>> without too many temporary bandaids. >>> >>> The loader is pretty decoupled from everything, so in case anybody >>> needs any of these Forth cornercases, they can use 11.X loader with >>> very little, if any, trouble. >>> >> As a person that both reviewed the GSoC code you are working with >> (in-depth; including a list of short-comings) and the most likely person to >> bring it up-to-par after it is committed, I have 2 opinions: >> >> 1. Please allow both boot systems for a while so that the lua-based menu >> can be made as feature full as the Forth menu. Example: submenus were added >> in Forth long after the GSoC lua project had ended >> > OK. The plan outlined does that. The lua code will be installed into /boot. > But it will be .lua, so no conflicts with .4th. And we start from > loader.lua not loader.rc. > > >> 2. Please don’t force us to run Lua until I can code the new features >> > OK > > >> And as the principal author of the Forth menu since 9.0: >> >> 3. Please give me a way to run my code (at the very least until I can >> bring the Lua up to snuff; and if I can’t just let me run Forth >> in-perpetuity). >> >> Interrupting boot1 so I can drive the system in the pre-boot Execution env >> is very important to me. > > For !EFI, this is relatively easy. boot1 you can type /boot/loader_forth > instead of the default /boot/loader if the symlink changes and you want to > go back. > > For EFI the answer is more complicated. boot1.efi is going away, so > loader.efi will move to the ESP in \efi\freebsd\loader.efi, but it's easy > enough to have multiple versions there (loader_lua.efi and > loader_forth.efi) and select via EFI Shell or EFI Env variables which one > you want should you need to fall back. so, there are multiple loaders. zfsloader and loader for example. how does this fit into the picture you are drawing? a symlink for each? > > Does that answer your concerns? > > Warner > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2f744512-6ed1-eebf-7dba-ddba2786d4de>