On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>> 4. An issue with using syslinux's format, as well as the original
>> bootloader spec format, and a major source of disagreement, is the
>> assumption that the kernel and initrd are on the same file system as
>> the
Hi,
> > ... and have a fixed grub2.cfg which basically has the command to parse
> > the syslinux config file?
> >
>
> OK so there are a few things:
>
> 1. The information needed to present boot options, the "menu entries",
> are a separate thing from the bootloader specific configuration file
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 2:17 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> > Adam, the only other distro that has serious alternate architecture
>> > support,
>> > AFAIK, is Debian. How do they handle grub2 + non-x86? Likewise, the
>> > alternate architectures that we support, how do
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 10:17:56AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Hmm, uboot can use extlinux-style config files, and I recently noticed
> grub2 has a command to parse syslinux config files too. Have not tried
> to use that though.
It does?!
> So possibly we can settle on syslinux syntax for
Hi,
> > Adam, the only other distro that has serious alternate architecture support,
> > AFAIK, is Debian. How do they handle grub2 + non-x86? Likewise, the
> > alternate architectures that we support, how do we handle their bootloaders?
> > Are they grub-based? Ext/Syslinux based? Grub-legacy?
>> My recollection is grubby was going to get a rethink, but I don't know
>> the scope. There are test cases built-into grubby that are considered
>> valuable, I'm not sure about the rest. Gene found the code difficult.
>> I think the main issue is, whether grubby or something else, it needs
>> to
On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 8:01 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Chris Murphy
Chris Murphy wrote:
> My recollection is grubby was going to get a rethink, but I don't know
> the scope. There are test cases built-into grubby that are considered
> valuable, I'm not sure about the rest. Gene found the code difficult.
> I think the main issue is, whether grubby or something
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 8:01 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>> Changed this subject to match the other one I changed, so if
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> Changed this subject to match the other one I changed, so if I'm doing
>> it wrong at least I'm consistent!
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Changed this subject to match the other one I changed, so if I'm doing
> it wrong at least I'm consistent!
>
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> So, I think we would need to get
Changed this subject to match the other one I changed, so if I'm doing
it wrong at least I'm consistent!
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Oct 2016 00:18:21 -0400
> Eric Griffith wrote:
>
>> I'm just thinking out loud here,
This probably should have its own thread but I'm just changing the subject.
On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 10:18 PM, Eric Griffith wrote:
> I'm just thinking out loud here, but, given that rpm-ostree does not use
> grubby, and we do have the Bootloader Spec, and no other distro
13 matches
Mail list logo