Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-11-01 Thread Bruce Evans
On Mon, 30 Oct 2006, John Baldwin wrote: On Thursday 26 October 2006 15:54, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 03:42:34PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: On Thursday 26 October 2006 15:18, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 11:38:24AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: Sorry, I

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-11-01 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 12:44:56AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: The masking hack is probably only needed for aout. For elf, objdump -h /kernel says: % Sections: % Idx Name Size VMA LMA File off Algn % ... % CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, READONLY, DATA %

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-30 Thread John Baldwin
On Thursday 26 October 2006 15:54, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 03:42:34PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: On Thursday 26 October 2006 15:18, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 11:38:24AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: On Thursday 26 October 2006 10:42, Ruslan Ermilov

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-27 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 01:54:11AM +0100, Bruce M. Simpson wrote: Do we even need the PAGING code in btx any more? It might make the real mode hackery less confusing to implement. It's #ifdef'ed out and not compiled in by default, what's the problem with that? Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-26 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 01:09:15PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote: On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 09:10:26PM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: I just tried to load my standard kernel from the boot blocks (instead of using loader(8)), but I either get a hang before the kernel prints anything, or a BTX

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-26 Thread Bruce Evans
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 01:09:15PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote: On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 09:10:26PM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: I just tried to load my standard kernel from the boot blocks (instead of using loader(8)), but I either get a hang before the

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-26 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 10:52:30PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: 3) It's currently broken even on i386; backing out rev. 1.71 of boot2.c by jhb@ fixes this for me. : revision 1.71 : date: 2004/09/18 02:07:00; author: jhb; state: Exp; lines: +3

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-26 Thread John Baldwin
On Thursday 26 October 2006 08:52, Bruce Evans wrote: On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 01:09:15PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote: On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 09:10:26PM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: I just tried to load my standard kernel from the boot blocks

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-26 Thread John Baldwin
On Thursday 26 October 2006 10:18, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 10:52:30PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: 3) It's currently broken even on i386; backing out rev. 1.71 of boot2.c by jhb@ fixes this for me. : revision 1.71 :

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-26 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 10:28:09AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: On Thursday 26 October 2006 10:18, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 10:52:30PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: 3) It's currently broken even on i386; backing out rev.

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-26 Thread John Baldwin
On Thursday 26 October 2006 10:42, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 10:28:09AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: On Thursday 26 October 2006 10:18, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 10:52:30PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: 3)

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-26 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 11:38:24AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: On Thursday 26 October 2006 10:42, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 10:28:09AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: boot2 should do whatever loader does. But this would be a regression, since loader(8) does the following,

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-26 Thread John Baldwin
On Thursday 26 October 2006 15:18, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 11:38:24AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: On Thursday 26 October 2006 10:42, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 10:28:09AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: boot2 should do whatever loader does. But

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-26 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 03:42:34PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: On Thursday 26 October 2006 15:18, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 11:38:24AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: On Thursday 26 October 2006 10:42, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 10:28:09AM -0400, John

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-10-26 Thread Bruce M. Simpson
Ruslan Ermilov wrote: I've been investigating this today. Here's what I've found: 1) You need hints statically compiled into your kernel. (This has been a long time requirement.) 2) You can only do it on i386, because boot2 only knows about ELF32, so attempts to load ELF64 amd64

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-09-11 Thread Brooks Davis
On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 09:10:26PM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: I just tried to load my standard kernel from the boot blocks (instead of using loader(8)), but I either get a hang before the kernel prints anything, or a BTX halted. Is this still supposed to work in 6- stable, or has it

Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-09-10 Thread Stefan Bethke
I just tried to load my standard kernel from the boot blocks (instead of using loader(8)), but I either get a hang before the kernel prints anything, or a BTX halted. Is this still supposed to work in 6- stable, or has it finally disappeared? Thanks, Stefan -- Stefan Bethke [EMAIL

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-09-10 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 09:10:26PM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: I just tried to load my standard kernel from the boot blocks (instead of using loader(8)), but I either get a hang before the kernel prints anything, or a BTX halted. Is this still supposed to work in 6- stable, or has it

Re: Still possible to directly boot without loader?

2006-09-10 Thread Stefan Bethke
Am 10.09.2006 um 21:13 schrieb Kris Kennaway: On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 09:10:26PM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: I just tried to load my standard kernel from the boot blocks (instead of using loader(8)), but I either get a hang before the kernel prints anything, or a BTX halted. Is this still