Michael, thanks for your patience and kind word to give so much helpful information. Although I should turn to other way and give it up, it's indeed helpful for me to understand deeply about UNDI.
Thank you again! Sean On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Michael Brown <[email protected]>wrote: > On Thursday 24 Jun 2010 11:52:35 Sean Shoufu Luo wrote: > > Many thanks for kind suggestion! I just work for our marketing guy, > > regardless of bad or good. ^_^ > > Unfortunately your marketing guy is asking you to do something that is > technically impossible. He may as well ask you to create a perpetual > motion > machine. You cannot succeed. > > > Back to the question. I don't understand your comment 'You can do, > > potentially'. From my understand, it is _*_not*__ standard to initialize > > !PXE structure when UNDI loader called (as gPXE doesn't), but only if > boot > > from network. Am I right? > > The UNDI loader is the component that initialises the !PXE structure. It > is > called implicitly from the ROM's BEV when booting from the network. > > > In other words, given a PXE ROM, it cannot be sure that !PXE will be > > initialized when not boot from network, even if I call UNDI loader! As a > > result, I cannot initialize PXE stack for UNDI API, if so, what can I do? > > If you could call the UNDI loader then that would create the !PXE > structure, > which you could then use. What I am trying to explain to you is that there > exist large numbers of machines in which you simply will not be able to > call > the UNDI loader. Your approach cannot work as a general solution. > > You are wasting your time and resources by following this path. Stop now. > If > you need advice on how to create a shim layer to allow you to use Linux (or > BSD, or gPXE, etc.) drivers, feel free to contact me off-list. > > Michael >
_______________________________________________ gPXE-devel mailing list [email protected] http://etherboot.org/mailman/listinfo/gpxe-devel
