Re: Deficiencies in guest bootloader design

[Michael Paesold <mpaesold@gmx.at>]

Ewan Mellor wrote:
>> Is there anyone working on bootloader improvements? If not, is a change to 
>> move the bootloader stuff from xm to Xend acceptable? In that case I could 
>> try to come up with a patch.
> 
> Certainly such a patch would be accepted.  There was a long thread discussing
> bootloaders recently -- you should dig it out of the archive and see what the
> conclusions were -- there seem to be a few competing ideas for bootloader
> support in Xen (pygrub and domUloader being the two prominent ones).  If you
> were going to put some effort into this, it would be appreciated by a number
> of the Xen users, certainly.

I have read through the threads about pygrub/domUloader in the archives, 
although I have not found discussion about the initial inclusion of pygrub. 
I mostly see discussions about the actual features of the boot loaders 
themselves, not really about integration relevant to my question.

I see the most important question is that of interaction with the user, 
since that seems to be the main reason for bootloader being invoked from xm 
instead of Xend. I will study the code to see what can be done.

I appreciate any input or help!

Best Regards,
Michael