14-Jul-00 16:41 you wrote:
From: "Khimenko Victor" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Bug in kernel - how to make big kernel bootable with GRUB (was Re:Linux
2.4.0-Test{1,2} with Grub (I think I found the answer))
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 04:22:49 +0400 (MSD)
But even then GRUB will not use full
Followup to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
By author:"Khimenko Victor" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
Who's the bright idea was to extend maximum kernel beyond 1MB and STILL write
only two bytes of sys_size in boot sector anyway ? And why it was done via
buf in first place ?
In 8kmab1$ja8$[EMAIL PROTECTED] H. Peter Anvin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Followup to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
By author:"Khimenko Victor" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
Who's the bright idea was to extend maximum kernel beyond 1MB and STILL write
only two bytes of sys_size
In 8kmadc$jb4$[EMAIL PROTECTED] H. Peter Anvin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Followup to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
By author:"Khimenko Victor" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
The field never got extended because nobody really needed it extended.
That's as simple as it can get,
Followup to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
By author:"Khimenko Victor" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
The field never got extended because nobody really needed it extended.
That's as simple as it can get, no?
No. When you have field 2 bytes in size and you want to store there
14-Jul-00 05:00 you wrote:
From: "Khimenko Victor" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.0-Test{1,2} with Grub (I think I found the answer)
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 20:46:30 +0400 (MSD)
I do not think it justifies GRUB unability to load such kernel: latest LiLo
works fine for it...
In [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linus Torvalds
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Khimenko Victor wrote:
Huh. Patch is trivial. Really trivial. Just one problem: I do not think it'll
be applied. Since it's TWO patches: one for kernel and one for GRUB.
Actually, the only problem with
