From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp111.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com (smtp111.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.198.210]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9BFE267A79 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2006 13:06:57 +1100 (EST) From: Brent Cook To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: make install on ppc Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 19:56:40 -0600 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Message-Id: <200603261956.40700.bcook@bpointsys.com> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sunday 26 March 2006 19:42, Jin Qi Huang wrote: > I also think the 'make install' is very useful, now on ia32, the 'make > install' provided by the latest kernel linux-2.6.16 not only create > initrd, copy vmlinuz and System.map to /boot directory, but also update > grub, ppc32 does not provide this useful feature, maybe it is a pity! > Maybe narrow it to define 'make install' for new world/old world Macintoshes, or IBM machines? I can't see a generic make install being useful for the wider range of platforms that fall under ppc. 'make install' appears to me to be very platform dependent. Sure, on x86, you can reasonably assume that the majority of systems have the kernel on a disk under /boot and the bootloader is grub or lilo. I have 5 ppc machines currently, and no two use the same bootloader or kernel image. I've seen u-boot, yaboot, quik, powerboot (Motorola/Force), xmon (XES) and more, and they all required different post-processing to the kernel image to boot. For most of these, there is no way to programmatically guess where a particular kernel image should go to work with the boot loader. - Brent