Follow-up Comment #18, bug #13606 (project grub):
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=blob;f=Documentation/x86/i386/boot.txt;hb=HEAD
The Kernel documentation says:
Protocol 2.02: (Kernel 2.4.0-test3-pre3)
Should we even bother to support kernels below 2.4.0 ?
I
Follow-up Comment #19, bug #13606 (project grub):
Urm why does the report say 2.02 ?
As linked in previous post protocol 2.03 says only:
Protocol 2.03: (Kernel 2.4.18-pre1) Explicitly makes the highest possible
initrd address available to the bootloader.
So either 2.02 is
Follow-up Comment #20, bug #13606 (project grub):
Hello,
The boot protocol 2.02 had the cmd_line_ptr which points to null terminated
string. There was a comment in the documentation that this string will be
truncated to 256 by the kernel but may be longer.
grub developers interpreted the above
Follow-up Comment #16, bug #13606 (project grub):
There's a new loader now, in loader/i386/linux.c, which for now is only used
on coreboot (but is trivial to enable it on i386-pc by editting
conf/i386-pc.*). Does it also exhibit this problem?
Follow-up Comment #17, bug #13606 (project grub):
There's a new loader now, in loader/i386/linux.c, which for
now is only used on coreboot (but is trivial to enable it on
i386-pc by editting conf/i386-pc.*). Does it also exhibit
this problem?
As far as I can see,
Follow-up Comment #15, bug #13606 (project grub):
Alon Bar-Lev
Marco Okuji: could you take care of the legal stuff?
What legal stuff? This is only a patch.
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Contributions.html#Contributions
Everything modified on GRUB is a patch.
only patches
Update of bug #13606 (project grub):
Open/Closed: Closed = Open
Release: 0.96-2 = CVS
___
Follow-up Comment #12:
Marco Okuji: could
Follow-up Comment #13, bug #13606 (project grub):
Hello,
Marco Okuji: could you take care of the legal stuff?
What legal stuff? This is only a patch.
Alon: could you include a ChangeLog entry?
Something such as:
cmd_line_ptr should not be truncated to 256.
You may also
want to send a
Additional Item Attachment, bug #13606 (project grub):
File name: grub-1.96-long-cmdline.patch Size:3 KB
___
Reply to this item at:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?13606
___
Message sent
Additional Item Attachment, bug #13606 (project grub):
File name: 550_all_grub-0.97-long-commandline.patch Size:1 KB
___
Reply to this item at:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?13606
___
Follow-up Comment #11, bug #13606 (project grub):
The last release was 1.95, although I wouldn't recommend using it because it
has known bugs. Try CVS instead.
As for a stable release (2.0), we haven't reached that yet, but it's worth
noting that GRUB Legacy never had a stable release (1.0)
Follow-up Comment #10, bug #13606 (project grub):
Nobody using grub-2, it even not released, right?
So why not push a new release to active users?
___
Reply to this item at:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?13606
Update of bug #13606 (project grub):
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Follow-up Comment #9:
We've moved to GRUB 2 as a development platform. Please can you check if this
bug still applies
Follow-up Comment #8, bug #13606 (project grub):
Hello,
Please notice that 2.6.21-rc1 already support 256 command-line size. Please
checkout the patch provided or create your own, so that users who use grub
will be able to use this new feature.
Thanks!
Additional Item Attachment, bug #13606 (project grub):
File name: grub-0.96-linux-0202.patch Size:1 KB
grub-0.96-linux-0202.patch
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/download.php?file_id=10589
___
Reply to this item at:
Follow-up Comment #7, bug #13606 (project grub):
Can you please look at file#10589 and confirm you adding this on grub 2.0?
___
Reply to this item at:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?13606
___
Follow-up Comment #6, bug #13606 (project grub):
Hello,
Well... I had to do it my-self... Although I am not sure that this is
correct. Can you please at least look at this patch and approve that it does
what it ment to?
But I think grub should handle (as it states in boot.txt):
a boot loader
Additional Item Attachment, bug #13606 (project grub):
File name: grub-0.96-linux-0202.patch Size:1 KB
grub-0.96-linux-0202.patch
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/download.php?file_id=9782
___
Reply to this item at:
Additional Item Attachment, bug #13606 (project grub):
File name: grub-0.96-linux-0202.patch Size:1 KB
grub-0.96-linux-0202.patch - no identiation
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/download.php?file_id=9783
___
Reply to this item at:
Follow-up Comment #5, bug #13606 (project grub):
Hello,
At kernel 2.6.14 we finally succeeded in modifying the document:
-
From THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL:
The kernel command line is a null-terminated string currently up to 255
characters long, plus the final null. A string that is
Follow-up Comment #4, bug #13606 (project grub):
Hello Yoshinori,
I will be happy to read your comments regarding my reply...
___
Reply to this item at:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitemitem_id=13606
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #13606 (project grub):
Thank you Yoshinori for your response!!!
I've entered this issue since once I had a need for 256 command line
length... And started investigate why it cannot be done.
I've read the boot protocol, and it seems the old boot protocol had a
Follow-up Comment #2, bug #13606 (project grub):
I don't think this is a bug. From THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL:
THE KERNEL COMMAND LINE
The kernel command line has become an important way for the boot
loader to communicate with the kernel. Some of its options are also
relevant to the
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #13606 (project grub):
Hello,
Can anybody confirm this is a bug?
This behavior is the same in GRUB 2... So I think it is a good time to fix
it...
Thanks!
___
Reply to this item at:
URL:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitemitem_id=13606
Summary: GRUB should allow Linux command-line256 bytes with
boot protocol2.02
Project: GNU GRUB
Submitted by: alonbl
Submitted on: Sat 07/02/2005 at 10:40
25 matches
Mail list logo
