On Feb 23, OKUJI Yoshinori wrote:
> From: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: ack! grub bug...
> Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:57:47 -0500
>
> > hrm, well... the thing is, hardware is out there, and more is coming
> > out, where mem=XX simply will break on that machine. In the case of a
> > broken bios (bad e820, etc.), the boot loader would need to pass memory
> > regions to the kernel, so IMHO having the rule "always pass mem=XX by
> > default" breaks on newer hardware.
>
> So I said that that should be fixed in Linux. I don't change anything,
> unless you give me a good explanation of why that shouldn't be
> addressed by Linux.
If I understand correctly, the problem with mem=XX and linux-2.4 is
when there are memory holes. It is quite clear that old Linux
versions have the same problem with memory holes, since there is no
way to tell the kernel where they are. So it wouldn't break anything
if grub would omit the mem=XX parameter when it detects a memory hole.
Jochen
_______________________________________________
Bug-grub mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-grub
