Al Boldi wrote: > Jordan Crouse wrote: >> On 16/11/07 14:58 -0800, Steve Isaacs wrote: >>> Jordan Crouse wrote: >>>> Well, first and foremost, because the tiny kernel already knows how to >>>> do >>> I'm sorry, can someone enlighten me as to what a "tiny kernel" is? Is >>> that anything similar to this? http://www.selenic.com/linux-tiny/ >> Well, typically, its any kernel that is small enough to fit on the ROM, >> with small filesystem to accompany it. And strangely enough, many >> people do use the linux-tiny patches to help make said kernel small >> enough. > > The problem with the current tiny-kernel approach is that, it can't get > nearly as tiny as filo. And when you have legacy systems like i440bx with > only 256kb flash, then tiny-kernel becomes a definite no go, which make filo > the only viable solution.
The i440bx was released nearly 9 years ago. Why be concerned with a very small fraction of the potential LinuxBIOS applications? Who is or will be designing anything with only 2Mb (256KB) of Flash? It's difficult to even find Flash under 4Mb (512KB) in high volume. -Bari -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
