netboot/UNDI status

netboot/UNDI status

[Douglas Ward]

I was wondering if any work has been completed on netboot for gurb2. I'm
most interested in a UNDI driver as my current setup using gpxe and
pxelinux. pxelinux does a fine job but I have always preferred grub.

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Marco Gerards]

Douglas Ward <douglas.ward@prolly.org> writes:

> I was wondering if any work has been completed on netboot for gurb2. I'm
> most interested in a UNDI driver as my current setup using gpxe and
> pxelinux. pxelinux does a fine job but I have always preferred grub.

There is an outstanding patch for ethernet support.  I should clean it
up and commit it soon.  When this is in place, someone could implement
UNDI.  As for IPv4, I should work on it.

But to be honest, there are more important issues than networking in
the short term...

--
Marco

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Robert Millan]

On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:38:31PM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
> 
> But to be honest, there are more important issues than networking in
> the short term...

ACK.  Let's focus on what GRUB excels at, instead of trying to compete
with etherboot just yet...

-- 
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 /.)

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Douglas Ward]

Robert Millan wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:38:31PM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
>   
>> But to be honest, there are more important issues than networking in
>> the short term...
>>     
>
> ACK.  Let's focus on what GRUB excels at, instead of trying to compete
> with etherboot just yet...
>
>   
actually what i need isn't something that competes with etherboot/gpxe
but something that competes with pxelinux.

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Bean]

On Jan 23, 2008 11:46 PM, Douglas Ward <douglas.ward@prolly.org> wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:38:31PM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
> >
> >> But to be honest, there are more important issues than networking in
> >> the short term...
> >>
> >
> > ACK.  Let's focus on what GRUB excels at, instead of trying to compete
> > with etherboot just yet...
> >
> >
> actually what i need isn't something that competes with etherboot/gpxe
> but something that competes with pxelinux.

UNDI support is not difficult, i have written one for grub4dos. maybe
i can port it to grub2 sometime.

-- 
Bean

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Marco Gerards]

Bean <bean123ch@gmail.com> writes:

> On Jan 23, 2008 11:46 PM, Douglas Ward <douglas.ward@prolly.org> wrote:
>> Robert Millan wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:38:31PM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
>> >
>> >> But to be honest, there are more important issues than networking in
>> >> the short term...
>> >>
>> >
>> > ACK.  Let's focus on what GRUB excels at, instead of trying to compete
>> > with etherboot just yet...
>> >
>> >
>> actually what i need isn't something that competes with etherboot/gpxe
>> but something that competes with pxelinux.
>
> UNDI support is not difficult, i have written one for grub4dos. maybe
> i can port it to grub2 sometime.

That would be nice, especially when the Ethernet code is in place.
Can you wait for that, so common interfaces are used?

--
Marco

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Marco Gerards]

Douglas Ward <douglas.ward@prolly.org> writes:

> Robert Millan wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:38:31PM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
>>   
>>> But to be honest, there are more important issues than networking in
>>> the short term...
>>>     
>>
>> ACK.  Let's focus on what GRUB excels at, instead of trying to compete
>> with etherboot just yet...
>>   
> actually what i need isn't something that competes with etherboot/gpxe
> but something that competes with pxelinux.

I am not a networking expert.  pxelinux means that you load it over
PXE, not that it adds such capabilities?

You can make a PXE binary from GRUB 2.  So GRUB 2 can be transferred
over PXE.  But GRUB cannot access the network after that.  This is
work in progress, but this will not happen the next few months.

--
Marco

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Yoshinori K. Okuji]

On Wednesday 23 January 2008 16:46, Douglas Ward wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:38:31PM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
> >> But to be honest, there are more important issues than networking in
> >> the short term...
> >
> > ACK.  Let's focus on what GRUB excels at, instead of trying to compete
> > with etherboot just yet...
>
> actually what i need isn't something that competes with etherboot/gpxe
> but something that competes with pxelinux.

I hate using the word "compete". There is no fact that we are competitors. 
Their targets are simply different, and we have been collaborating with 
etherboot/gpxe.

Okuji

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Robert Millan]

On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 09:49:22AM +0100, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 January 2008 16:46, Douglas Ward wrote:
> > Robert Millan wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:38:31PM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
> > >> But to be honest, there are more important issues than networking in
> > >> the short term...
> > >
> > > ACK.  Let's focus on what GRUB excels at, instead of trying to compete
> > > with etherboot just yet...
> >
> > actually what i need isn't something that competes with etherboot/gpxe
> > but something that competes with pxelinux.
> 
> I hate using the word "compete". There is no fact that we are competitors. 
> Their targets are simply different, and we have been collaborating with 
> etherboot/gpxe.

Well, if we can collaborate by sharing the same driver collection that's even
better, of course.  This was done for GRUB Legacy, right?

-- 
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 /.)

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Yoshinori K. Okuji]

On Thursday 24 January 2008 13:42, Robert Millan wrote:
> Well, if we can collaborate by sharing the same driver collection that's
> even better, of course.  This was done for GRUB Legacy, right?

Sure. I had a very short conversation with gpxe developers last year, and we 
have agreed that we should share work. In GRUB Legacy, we tried to keep 
etherboot drivers as intact as possible, and we contributed back by providing 
bug fixes. IMO, this should be continued in GRUB 2 as well.

Okuji

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Marco Gerards]

"Yoshinori K. Okuji" <okuji@enbug.org> writes:

> On Thursday 24 January 2008 13:42, Robert Millan wrote:
>> Well, if we can collaborate by sharing the same driver collection that's
>> even better, of course.  This was done for GRUB Legacy, right?
>
> Sure. I had a very short conversation with gpxe developers last year, and we 
> have agreed that we should share work. In GRUB Legacy, we tried to keep 
> etherboot drivers as intact as possible, and we contributed back by providing 
> bug fixes. IMO, this should be continued in GRUB 2 as well.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but aren't some files licensed under
the GPL, with an additional demand that you shouldn't use it outside
etherboot?

I will have to check this to be sure.  But something to wrap their
drivers for GRUB 2 so it cooperates would be nice...  I just do not
like glue code that much...

--
Marco

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Robert Millan]

On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 10:00:17AM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
> "Yoshinori K. Okuji" <okuji@enbug.org> writes:
> 
> > On Thursday 24 January 2008 13:42, Robert Millan wrote:
> >> Well, if we can collaborate by sharing the same driver collection that's
> >> even better, of course.  This was done for GRUB Legacy, right?
> >
> > Sure. I had a very short conversation with gpxe developers last year, and we 
> > have agreed that we should share work. In GRUB Legacy, we tried to keep 
> > etherboot drivers as intact as possible, and we contributed back by providing 
> > bug fixes. IMO, this should be continued in GRUB 2 as well.
> 
> Please correct me if I am wrong, but aren't some files licensed under
> the GPL, with an additional demand that you shouldn't use it outside
> etherboot?

Just one driver is known to do that.  Check our BTS.

Besides, it might even be illegal to distribute those drivers, even as part of
etherboot.

-- 
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 /.)

Re: netboot/UNDI status

[Yoshinori K. Okuji]

On Friday 25 January 2008 14:25, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 10:00:17AM +0100, Marco Gerards wrote:
> > "Yoshinori K. Okuji" <okuji@enbug.org> writes:
> > > On Thursday 24 January 2008 13:42, Robert Millan wrote:
> > >> Well, if we can collaborate by sharing the same driver collection
> > >> that's even better, of course.  This was done for GRUB Legacy, right?
> > >
> > > Sure. I had a very short conversation with gpxe developers last year,
> > > and we have agreed that we should share work. In GRUB Legacy, we tried
> > > to keep etherboot drivers as intact as possible, and we contributed
> > > back by providing bug fixes. IMO, this should be continued in GRUB 2 as
> > > well.
> >
> > Please correct me if I am wrong, but aren't some files licensed under
> > the GPL, with an additional demand that you shouldn't use it outside
> > etherboot?
>
> Just one driver is known to do that.  Check our BTS.
>
> Besides, it might even be illegal to distribute those drivers, even as part
> of etherboot.

Right. Maybe I should contact gpxe developers, if they still have it.

Okuji