On Jan 23, 2008 12:51 AM, Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't like this very much. We don't have grub-mkimage options to > concatenate > it with boot.img, so why with lnxboot.img ?
The reason for new option is that the length of core.img needs to stored in lnxboot.img. Previously, i calculate the size using information in core.img header, but now there is issue, for example, 1. kernel lnxboot.img initrd core.img 2. cat lnxboot.img core.img > grub2.bin kernel grub2.bin initrd memdisk 1 and 2 looks the same to lnxboot header, it can't decide initrd is used as memdisk or core.img. However, 1 may not be that useful after all, we can disable this kind of usage. > Also, I can only think of very specific situations in which this interface > would be useful (that is, when firmware has only a linux loader). It makes > sense to me as a compatibility layer, yes. > > But it seems you want it as a general-purpose option; for that, why not make > it saner like multiboot? I don't think it's a good idea to compromise our > boot semantics because of the ones legacy Linux has. is multiboot support memdisk or something similar ? -- Bean _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
