From: Alessandro Rubini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: documentation question
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 23:02:15 +0200
> > For example, most workstations and some personal computers (such
> > as SparcStation and iMac) has a built-in firmware program, while IBM
> > PC has BIOS instead.
>
> There's no conceptual difference, they offer the same services.
Your issue is reasonable, but they don't offer the same.
> > The format of partition tables is not the same.
>
> Again, a detail. If the Linux kernel deals with all of them, can't
> GRUB do that too?
That is possible, if you implement architecture-dependent code for
each architecture (and most of the whole code is
architecture-dependent), like the boot code of Linux.
> Well, I don't have an HP at home (yet), but I remember that the first
> message is "loading IPL", and then the IPL loads the kernel accessing
> the filesystem. So can't the IPL be replaced with GRUB's stage 2?
Conceptually, you can.
> The design of GRUB is, in my opinion, "offering a decent user
> interface and menu system to make booting both easy for novices and
> configurable for technicians". The split in two stages is an accident.
However, you need to realize that having two stages (and even three
stages) are essential in current GRUB because of the poor PC
architecture. The fact affects the design.
(I think you are mistakenly using the word "design". "concept" is more
appropriate.)
> Actually, page 15 of the manual states that "support for non-PC
> hardware architectures is also planned" :)
That's right, but multi-architecture support is one of the goals in
GRUB 1.0 (or 2.0) which should be rewritten almost from scratch.
Probably, I should mention my idea more exactly: I don't think
*current* design and implementation of GRUB is portable, so the
document just says,
This is the documentation of GNU GRUB, the GRand Unified Bootloader,
a flexible and powerful boot loader program for PCs.
> /alessandro, guessing how many developers are currently hacking grub..
Should I answer this? :)
Okuji
