On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 21:38 -0500, Kyle McMartin wrote:
> On second thought, this is probably better since most people will
> presumably be booting non-PAE kernels, generating this message when
> they've not tried to force the issue seems silly.
>
> This way, the user will only see a warning if th
On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 21:38 -0500, Kyle McMartin wrote:
> On second thought, this is probably better since most people will
> presumably be booting non-PAE kernels, generating this message when
> they've not tried to force the issue seems silly.
why not go the simple way, and just remove noexec=o
On second thought, this is probably better since most people will
presumably be booting non-PAE kernels, generating this message when
they've not tried to force the issue seems silly.
This way, the user will only see a warning if they actually go
out and specify "noexec=on" on the command line.
S
Signed-off-by: Kyle McMartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff --git a/arch/i386/mm/init.c b/arch/i386/mm/init.c
index 84697df..fb61709 100644
--- a/arch/i386/mm/init.c
+++ b/arch/i386/mm/init.c
@@ -512,6 +512,9 @@ void __init paging_init(void)
set_nx();
if (nx_enabled)
prin
4 matches
Mail list logo