Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:05:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Brian Feldman <green@zone.syracuse.net> To: "Dag-Erling C. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=" <dag-erli@ifi.uio.no> Cc: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>, Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>, Studded <Studded@gorean.org>, Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, Edwin Culp <eculp@webwizard.org.mx>, FreeBSD-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ELF kernels (was: Make elf release) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9810132200440.14930-100000@zone.syracuse.net> In-Reply-To: <xzpk924nigr.fsf@hrotti.ifi.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
By all means, why not by default have sysinstall make a /boot.config with '/boot/loader' in it? Or rather, it's quite easy to make the boot block (1) just default to /boot/loader, so why not do that? IIRC, BTX now passes an a.out kernel the correct params now. Brian Feldman On 14 Oct 1998, Dag-Erling C. [iso-8859-1] Smørgrav wrote: > Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> writes: > > On Tuesday, 13 October 1998 at 17:09:30 +0800, Peter Wemm wrote: > > > IMHO, whether /kernel is a.out or elf is far less of an issue than which > > > bootblocks we use. > > I'm not sure whether you're talking about the same issue that Doug > > (Studded) is. I think moving to an ELF kernel 2 days before code > > freeze would be a disaster. > > ...but switching to Elf-aware boot blocks would not affect the kernel, > and would make a later transition to an Elf kernel less painful for > those who install 3.0-RELEASE from scratch. I think this is what Peter > meant. > > DES > -- > Dag-Erling Smørgrav - dag-erli@ifi.uio.no > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message > 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?Pine.BSF.4.05.9810132200440.14930-100000>