From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 22 14:51:20 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14D5810656FF for ; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:51:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EACED8FC19 for ; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:51:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (66.111.2.69.static.nyinternet.net [66.111.2.69]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E52246B92; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:51:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (smtp.hudson-trading.com [209.249.190.9]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E45658A025; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:51:17 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:50:32 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.1 (FreeBSD/7.3-CBSD-20100217; KDE/4.3.1; amd64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201003221050.32722.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:51:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.1 at bigwig.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=4.2 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on bigwig.baldwin.cx Cc: Alexander Best Subject: Re: [patch] teach the bootloader minor amd64 knowledge X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:51:20 -0000 On Monday 22 March 2010 9:50:05 am Alexander Best wrote: > hi there, > > since i386 and amd64 are sharing the same bootcode the bootloader gets named > "FreeBSD/i386" on amd64 too. the following patch is a cosmetic change to have > the bootloader identify itself as "FreeBSD/amd64" on amd64. > > any thoughts on this one? I would not do this. They really are the same binary. You can take a /boot/loader built under FreeBSD/i386 and use it to load an amd64 kernel and vice versa. The one change I looked at doing a while back was renaming the i386/amd64 boot bits to identify themselves as 'FreeBSD/x86' rather than 'FreeBSD/i386'. -- John Baldwin