Parag Patel wrote:
It can't, without shitloads of drivers. :)
("I asked you not to tell me that, Ninety-Nine!")
A new loader would need to be written that would have a way to talk to
whatever firmware is in the box, Open Firmware, LinuxBIOS, etc.
(Assuming that the firmware has a
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 07:06:36 +0900, "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
And, in the process, they are teaching the firmware about Ext2FS,
Ext3FS, RheiserFS, (in our case) ffs, vinum, etc, so it can find the
kernel in whatever place it is, or resorting to some sort of bootfs
(though any software RAID would
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Parag Patel wrote:
It's fairly simple, other than dealing with the
various motherboard/chipset vagaries.
So far those vagaries are not much code, something like 200 lines tops.
It's possible to make a complete BIOS based on Linux that in turn loads
and boots another
Parag Patel wrote:
Well, it's more of a matter of putting the kernel itself into the boot
ROM with some small assembly/C code to turn on DRAM and an ungzipper to
load and run it. It's fairly simple, other than dealing with the
various motherboard/chipset vagaries.
Ah, yes, I forgot about
On 18-Jun-00 Parag Patel wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 07:35:51 +0900, "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
Loader(8) runs using BIOS services, and loads the kernel from any drive
that BIOS recognizes. It has also been enhanced with PXE knowledge, so
he can load from that to.
My mistake, as Ron pointed
On 19-Jun-00 Coleman Kane wrote:
If you start out with a board based on a reference design, say the Intel
SE440BX, you already have access to all this info. Most chipset vendors have
info on this sort of thing up on their webpage, I know intel is really good
about this sort of thing (though
I never said it would be easy, I simply was stating that the reference
designs tend to stick to documented specifications, typically. Of
course, writing a BIOS is hard enough.
John Baldwin had the audacity to say:
On 19-Jun-00 Coleman Kane wrote:
If you start out with a board based on a
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 07:35:51 +0900, "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
Loader(8) runs using BIOS services, and loads the kernel from any drive
that BIOS recognizes. It has also been enhanced with PXE knowledge, so
he can load from that to.
My mistake, as Ron pointed out, since loader uses the BIOS
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 07:35:51 +0900, "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
Loader(8) runs using BIOS services, and loads the kernel from any drive
that BIOS recognizes. It has also been enhanced with PXE knowledge, so
he can load from that to.
My mistake, as Ron pointed out, since loader uses the
If you start out with a board based on a reference design, say the Intel
SE440BX, you already have access to all this info. Most chipset vendors have
info on this sort of thing up on their webpage, I know intel is really good
about this sort of thing (though I am not so sure about the
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Daniel C. Sobral" writes:
: If your BIOS project recognizes the flash card as a disk, accessible
: with normal BIOS functions, then loader can work as is (minus whatever
: you need modified). If not, it can be changed to understand whatever you
: have to access the
Parag Patel wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 07:35:51 +0900, "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
Loader(8) runs using BIOS services, and loads the kernel from any drive
that BIOS recognizes. It has also been enhanced with PXE knowledge, so
he can load from that to.
My mistake, as Ron pointed out,
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 13:49:36 +0900, "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
Err... how is a loader that doesn't use BIOS going to access the hard
disk? I truly hope the answer is not to the effect of requiring
shitloads of drivers.
It can't, without shitloads of drivers. :)
("I asked you not to tell me
My mistake, as Ron pointed out, since loader uses the BIOS services, it
can't run when there is no BIOS. Now if someone writes a loader that
doesn't use a BIOS...
Err... how is a loader that doesn't use BIOS going to access the hard
disk? I truly hope the answer is not to the effect of
So, I repeat: easily done, not acceptable to freebsd core.
As has been mentioned by several people already, 'freebsd core' hasn't
discussed this as a group and hasn't made any declaration of acceptabilty.
That said, I'll say (as a core member, but representing only myself) that
I think
So, I repeat: easily done, not acceptable to freebsd core.
Erm, hello?
I really don't understand this message at all, Ron. As far as I know,
FreeBSD core has expressed NO opinion on this issue whatsoever and
it's therefore highly unfair of you to state that we:
a) Even have a firm
The key is that freebsd may need to change a few things to make it
bootable from cold hardware. I don't think this is for sure, but it may
happen. I hope the team is receptive to such changes ...
ie. "LinuxBIOS won't initialise the system correctly, so you'd better
clean up after it"?
How
We really were hoping we'd get some help from a motherboard vendor but
that just hasn't been the case. No-one seems interested in the
relatively low quantities of boards we'd move.
Too bad we're already a big customer of these boards -- We'd love to have
this kind of information about
sorry, jordan.
my bad. Anyway we're going to try a kernel next week that parag sent me.
ron
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
(paul asks a good microcode question). I can't answer it yet.
Here's my take on this: we're going to do a proof of concept of this idea.
We now have three partners: SiS, Compaq, and Dell. Long-term goal is to
get industry to pick it up. This is a means to an end. I don't want to be
Mr. LinuxBIOS
[not on list]
Regarding the freebsd bios and availablity of firmware you should check out
http://developer.intel.com/technology/efi/index.htm
The sample implementation uses a FBSD core and provides
a tcp/ip stack
ftp client and server
python interpreter
read
Ronald G Minnich wrote:
my bad. Anyway we're going to try a kernel next week that parag sent me.
Mmmm. I saw no comments on my loader question.
Loader(8) runs using BIOS services, and loads the kernel from any drive
that BIOS recognizes. It has also been enhanced with PXE knowledge, so
he
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 07:35:51 +0900, "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
Ronald G Minnich wrote:
my bad. Anyway we're going to try a kernel next week that parag sent me.
Mmmm. I saw no comments on my loader question.
Loader(8) runs using BIOS services, and loads the kernel from any drive
that BIOS
I'm confused. Acceptable to freebsd core isn't really the issue here.
FreeBSD is a volunteer project. If you do the work and submit the code
then 'core' has the option of deciding not to include it but if its
useful people will use it anyway regardless if its 'Official' or not. If
enough people
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ronald G
Minnich writes:
So, I repeat: easily done, not acceptable to freebsd core.
Uhm, Ron, I have not seen freebsd core take a stand on this,
and I'm a core team member, so I'm pretty sure they havn't.
I also doubt that they ever would do so.
Remember:
Ronald G Minnich wrote:
So, I repeat: easily done, not acceptable to freebsd core.
If you can easily do it, why aren't you? I had thought someone was
actively working on this (because it is SO obviously useful to have fast
reboots in an HA environment).
It's kind of a shame.
Sure is.
So, I repeat: easily done, not acceptable to freebsd core.
And again I tell you, no. Quite acceptable, not easily done. If someone
does it, we'll happily play along. I don't understand why you don't
understand this.
--
\\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith
\\
here's what we can. Somebody send a kernel for an L440GX+ that has pretty
minimal stuff. I'd prefer it to have IDE, no networking, no SCSI, i.e. a
pretty small thing. I'll try to use it as the payload for linuxbios and
see if it boots.
The key is that freebsd may need to change a few things to
here's what we can. Somebody send a kernel for an L440GX+ that has pretty
minimal stuff. I'd prefer it to have IDE, no networking, no SCSI, i.e. a
pretty small thing. I'll try to use it as the payload for linuxbios and
see if it boots.
GENERIC should work, presuming that the hardware's
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:37:51 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
ie. "LinuxBIOS won't initialise the system correctly, so you'd better
clean up after it"?
More like it ain't complete and is intended to boot Linux, so anything
that Linux initializes but FBSD doesn't is probably SOL. :)
I'm building a
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:37:51 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
ie. "LinuxBIOS won't initialise the system correctly, so you'd better
clean up after it"?
More like it ain't complete and is intended to boot Linux, so anything
that Linux initializes but FBSD doesn't is probably SOL. :)
8) Actually,
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:49:23 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
8) Actually, the things that really bother me are eg. interrupt routing
and the ACPI GPIO bits, since the former is board-specific and you *must*
know about it to set PCI up, and the latter is often necessary to do
important things like, eg.
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:49:23 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
8) Actually, the things that really bother me are eg. interrupt routing
and the ACPI GPIO bits, since the former is board-specific and you *must*
know about it to set PCI up, and the latter is often necessary to do
important things like,
On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 19:24:28 PDT, Mike Smith wrote:
Uh. You're kidding me, right?
Well, maybe a little. The L440GX+ board is well-documented with a nice
diagram documenting the IRQ swizzle. The SuperMicro board isn't, so I'm
probably screwed there.
I think it is possible to probe it by
Ronald G Minnich wrote:
here's what we can. Somebody send a kernel for an L440GX+ that has pretty
minimal stuff. I'd prefer it to have IDE, no networking, no SCSI, i.e. a
pretty small thing. I'll try to use it as the payload for linuxbios and
see if it boots.
I'm cc'ing Mike here so he can
35 matches
Mail list logo
