"Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko" <phcoder@gmail.com> writes:

> I like it in general however I had a comment: in future GRUB could be able
> to do the same through second approach: load a constructed kexec blob with
> all the parts. This would allow to e.g. kexec FreeBSD. This didn't have to
> be implemented now. Meanwhile can we use "kexec" as command name? It's fine
> to have aliases "linux" and co, just let's have a command line that won't
> be broken if second approach becomes a reality

I don't think I follow.  In this hypothetical future, couldn't we just
rename this code to something else and avoid the problem entirely?  But
maybe I'm misunderstanding.

In any case, I don't see support for aliases anywhere, so I'm not sure
what you're referring to.

Be well,
--Robbie