Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 15:27:51 -0800 From: David Greenman <dg@root.com> To: Erich Boleyn <erich@uruk.org> Cc: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Memory probe(s) in FreeBSD Message-ID: <199611172327.PAA19129@root.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 17 Nov 1996 15:24:45 PST." <E0vPGZx-0006py-00@uruk.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Hmm... this is starting to get complicated. I don't really want to fuss >with the old-style BSD booting interface much because it needs a lot of >fixing and simply can't be straightforwardly extended to include all the >new things one might want to do. > >How about we leave the existing boot interface the way it is, and I'll >generate a patch to use the new Multiboot interface (which can happily >co-exist with the BSD methodology). Some really big advantages of >the Multiboot stuff include of course the extra memory information, but >also a real text command-line (i.e. no patches to the bootloader for >every new kernel option supported) and multiple modules passed at boot-time >to the kernel would then be supported. > >What do you think? This is fine with me; I just object to dropping support for older bootblocks. I don't object to dropping support for really-old (pre-2.0.5) bootblocks, however. -DG David Greenman Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611172327.PAA19129>