On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Kay Sievers <k...@vrfy.org> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Shawn Landden <sh...@churchofgit.com> > wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Kay Sievers <k...@vrfy.org> wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:22 AM, Shawn Landden <sh...@churchofgit.com> > >> wrote: > >> > Still use helper when Xen Dom0, to avoid duplicating some hairy code. > >> > > >> > I think the rbtree version was far more understandable as > >> > greedy_realloc0() > >> > is very messy to do correctly. > >> > > >> > Take fopenat() from lsof. > >> > Add opendirat() > >> > >> We have that in util.c :: xopendirat() > >> > >> > Future: generate BootLoaderSpec files for other kernel install > locations > >> > >> This approach duplicates, the potentially complex, boot manager kernel > >> selection logic. > >> > >> The recent systemd-boot boot loader and efi stub loader which carries > >> the kernel, the cmdline, the initrd in one single EFI binary will also > >> not use any boot loader snippets, it will be discovered by the loader > >> itself, which parses the PE/COFF files and looks for specific content. > >> > >> The snippets are meant to unify the boot loader *configuration*, but > >> they do not mean that every bootable kernel will or should have one. > >> There might be many ways for kernels to be found by the boot loader, > >> the snippets are just one source for that. > >> > >> I'm not sure what exact problem this patch tries to solve, > > > > rebooting with kexec is faster than a full reboot. Currently we do not > > support kexec very well. Lennart asked for something like this, but > perhaps > > we no longer want to support kexec loading? > > I kind of miss a description what this change is supposed to support > in the end. It can't be described with "replacing a call to a binary". > > Automatic searching and deciding what kernel to boot, and how to > search for these kernels, and how all that should continue to work > reliably in the longer run, while the boot loaders underneath improve > and change; that is something we should define before and have a clear > idea, before we copy only parts of that logic from the current tools. > > I thought you wrote a specification? freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/BootLoaderSpec/
Anyways, you should at least merge this patch: 1423865887-1507-1-git-send-email-sh...@churchofgit.com ( https://www.mail-archive.com/systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org/msg28005.html ) > Thanks, > Kay > _______________________________________________ > systemd-devel mailing list > systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel > -- Shawn Landden
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
