"Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
> Possibly. Until we succesfully implement the code that let's us boot
> something besides linux, I really don't want to see a name change.
> Changing the name before we have gotten the code done seems really
> ahead of ourselves.
agreed.
Though to toss my thoughts in, when/if the name does change:
1) current name is a misnomer
linux -- eventually Linux kernel is not the only thing we will load
bios -- Basic Input/Output System. Not really true anyway.
2) linuxbios name should really be "basic bootstrap" or similar, but
that just doesn't have a good ring to it ;-)
3) linuxbios already has name recognition though.... this is a strong
argument for NOT changing the name at all, invalidating #1 and #2.
> As far as being able to replace a factory bios with linuxBIOS,
> linuxBIOS 1.0 should provide a way to do that. It probably should
> be a compatibilty layer that we load to boot windows. This whole
> conversation got started with the question of booting other things
> besides linux directly from linuxBIOS. Seriously linuxBIOS is coming
> along fine. And for some specific uses it works right now. It just
> happens that replacing a factory BIOS while ultimately a nice thing
> isn't important to linuxBIOS developers currently.
Though no code exists, so this name is free for the taking, that was the
original idea behind FreeBIOS -- linuxbios + a compat layer == freebios.
I really think linuxbios should be a tiny stub that boots an ELF image
from memory and nothing else. This ELF image would be Linux kernel for
most current uses, but it can be a firmware console in the case of the
Alpha project I'm working on, or it can be a BIOS emulation layer that
works with Windows/DOS.
Jeff
--
Jeff Garzik | Disbelief, that's why you fail.
Building 1024 |
MandrakeSoft |
