Re: moving ata initialisation to a command

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 05:47:36PM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
> Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 01:26:31PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 17:01 +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
> >> > A better solution, IMO, would be changing grub-mkrescue so it doesn't
> >> > load all modules.
> >> 
> >> Maybe grub-mkrescue should create a filesystem?  Even FAT should be
> >> fine.  This way, it will be possible to load problematic modules from
> >> the filesystem.  The only problem would be dependency on filesystem
> >> making tools.  Fortunately, mtools is quite common.
> >
> > I'd prefer to support embedding filesystems in core.img instead.  This
> > solves the problem for every situation instead of just PC boot media
> > (e.g. LinuxBIOS ELF payload image).
> 
> Agreed, I would like to see such feature.  Also for stuff like
> diskless boot.
> 
> What I had in mind was the following.  We could perhaps make it
> possible to add all files using grub-mkimage, not only modules.  When
> you add modules, those will be loaded automatically.  All other files
> will be ignored.
> 
> Another filesystem module has to be written.  It scans over these
> files and will make them available.  This can be simple and elegant.
> I do not like the idea of adding a diskimage or so.  Are you
> interested in working on this?

Well, I already have an almost-working implementation.  I guess I'll have to
defend it then! :-P

Really, it's clean and elegant.  Very simple and flexible.  Once I get the
address detection right, that is..

> > Anyway, as long as root privileges aren't made necessary, I'm fine with
> > grub-mkrescue creating a filesystem (one saner than FAT, preferably ;-).
> 
> Great!  Will you do that? :-)

No, I tried once and it was a mess of things.  Besides, when we have embedded
filesystem support this won't add any real advantage.

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)