On 10/19/2011 12:15 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Jason Hobbs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 11:08:04AM -0400, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On 10/17/2011 11:30 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> 2) Implement rudimentary boot menu support in u-boot (if it doesn't
>>>> already exist).  Doesn't need to be graphical, but at least have a
>>>> default boot with a list of other boot options.
>>>
>>> PXE boot support for u-boot just went in yesterday. This includes some
>>> generic menu support as part of it.
>>
>> The PXE code also includes a parser for pxelinux config files (really a
>> subset of pxelinux config file format). Since the syntax is the same for
>> syslinux config files, it would be straightforward to readapt the parser
>> to work for those too.
> 
> I think syslinux would work. It is something the OS could generate at
> kernel upgrade time, and when booting off disk it would avoid the need
> for the OS to figure out what specific magic the firmware uses to
> boot.  From what I can tell, the syslinux config file is limited, but
> it should be sufficient for what we need in the short term. If u-boot
> grows the ability to correctly identify the boot FAT partition for
> both the MBR & GPT uses cases, then making it pick up and use a
> syslinux file is trivial.
> 
> However, it does seem to require the kernel image to reside in the FAT
> partition which isn't really what we want in the longer term.
> 

u-boot has ext2 support. But I guess your point is more about having a
separate partition rather than supporting LVM, RAID, and all the latest
filesystems.

Rob

_______________________________________________
boot-architecture mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/boot-architecture

Reply via email to