On Fri, 2004-06-11 at 17:31, Mark Chambers wrote: > > > Yeah, having the bi_recs interface actually working > > > would be ideal, but at the present time nothing is > > > working and as AFAIK no-one is working on it. > > > > So we should offer some gentle encouragement. Like refusing to accept > > any further modifications to include/asm-ppc/ppcboot.h. > > > > Here's another idea - how about XML? That would be two steps forward, IMO, > instead of just going from one magic structure to another.
Well XML of all things must be magic considering that it automatically solves all problems all the time. > As to just trashing bd_t, does that mean users have to upgrade their > bootloader to use newer kernels, and could not switch back easily if > problems arose? Perhaps the kernel could identify whether the pointer is to > a bd_t or something else and handle it automatically? Don't worry this will never change the problem is not creating a big enough itch so nobody will do anything (again). ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
