* ron minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040311 15:16]: > On 11 Mar 2004, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > If the BIOS has to implement services an interpreted byte code where the > > kernel provides the interpreter at least gives the kernel guys the > > option of catching bugs, and working around them. I completely prefer > > AML over BIOS callbacks. > > YES!
In case of broken 16bit bioses there might be a point. But for us I don't really see the difference. If it's broken, we can fix it. Even when using callbacks, can't we? Stefan -- Stefan Reinauer, SUSE LINUX AG Head of Architecture Development _______________________________________________ Linuxbios mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
