-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 El Wed, 30 Oct 2013 09:47:04 -0600 Stephen Warren <[email protected]> escribió: > On 10/29/2013 05:00 PM, Robie Basak wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 04:11:53PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> I don't rememeber if this came up the last time we discussed > >> bootloader standardization, but there's a spec: > >> > >> http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/BootLoaderSpec/ > >> > >> ... which sounds like it'd be interesting if all bootloaders going > >> forward implemented, and all distros assumed. Pengutronix had a > >> nice demo of this at their booth at ELCE. > > > > Interesting, thanks! > > > > I'm not sure that this is quite relevant to the current question, > > though. The spec presupposes UEFI, which itself is an example of the > > spec that I'm after. But, AIUI, we can't quite do this today > > (though I appreciate that support is in the works - thank you Leif > > and Roy). > > Perhaps it's worded assuming UEFI, but I'm pretty sure it either > doesn't actually require UEFI in practice, or that there's an > extension to that spec being pushed that adapts it to non-UEFI > environments. As I mentioned, Pengutronix had a demo of it running at > ELCE, and IIRC they were using Barebox not UEFI as the bootloader.
The examples i believe are using UEFI but it is not a requirement. the implementation is basically extlinux with some set paths. with the sysboot command in u-boot it should be trivial to support. setting up the environment will be the hardest bit. I am working on getting the distro generic u-boot setting i talked about earlier this year implemented. Fedora's wandboard u-boots are using it and it is working well. > The following is where I got the link to the spec from > http://mindlinux.wordpress.com/2013/10/25/barebox-and-the-bootloader-specification-sasha-hauer-pengutronix/ > > > In the case of shipping an Ubuntu cloud guest image, for example, I > > think it's safe to assume that this image won't dual-boot with > > another distribution. > > For me, the interesting part of that spec isn't the > multi-distribution-co-existence aspect, but simply the fact that it's > a bootloader-independant format for specifying a list of kernels/... > to boot. While the spec supports the co-existence stuff, I guess > there's no specific need to distros to care about this; they just > install the appropriate config files for their own > kernels/filesystems, and are done. the filesystem for booting from is shared. so distros will need to make sure not to break other distros. But the idea is a simple unified location for booting from Dennis Dennis -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJScbIZAAoJEH7ltONmPFDRdpQP/24HepW3RXF3copWonGFYuCw tC0hx6KX+omOxmLNWWUCIyyXqWzyCmTlHVqT7daYGfrUv+v6w2pHAeXyMXNCMA0L mZzwP/qgHuOC/Z6w7vno2z+KvPct5ol2gCYYIDEP782Djwle7aHy+T802NLS42AC ASW15/A6068HjiZ1FtwHhYG4MjqpmW3c7K7lJgg67oi22+9BBkbWXfMlkE/mvRuq ViMZYsjP6BuPaOrC7fZKfpAAAoRmY8/ApJZzUwKEL7vB6FGUHlcOVwvKbYLd14Su BtRXnIB5ZxV6Ua94iM7wfH/oTH8hnTy7BrRVjO08BoT2+40f33ovF4v4nVmE/SDi 15pSrCcGT8CZQPdG3j0sSZld+8P8wepoSe7QqulTOJPQOwcvh+44a4TsP6Asib6B lCXM9JEDEumI6OYFtViFKs+W2chhXk3Ll3MD8VNHBCFjowYKH5qHm+a1NeDumCTS zCyGSU929J8XmrwCiVZAa9itTfXpNHSsetdINUzOJLuKioJsxZ+r33Va3yQ19lLs JbnztKe2gQujYuwerT0Z2NMfT1vdzWaYB6Qe6CzGVRXKEqVctushrIQoma4jLOTY 71CDSZD+Qp8U4Cj8+5Z9IO0pAnyov8gfDv7mZjZcC2z1xQjr4ifPRkqXjwoQLwMw MaqBVr+FZkUnuUGasRtJ =Pbom -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ cross-distro mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-distro
