From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.70]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65FC167A0E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 14:43:09 +1100 (EST) Received: from [63.246.184.80] (helo=[192.168.0.100]) by elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1FO56o-0007te-Nx for linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2006 22:43:06 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) In-Reply-To: <200603261956.40700.bcook@bpointsys.com> References: <200603261956.40700.bcook@bpointsys.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: From: Hollis Blanchard Subject: Re: make install on ppc Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 21:43:16 -0600 To: linuxppc-dev list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mar 26, 2006, at 7:56 PM, Brent Cook wrote: > 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! The feature sounds like a good idea to me, even if it's just the copying files part. Do any PPC distros provide a working installkernel script? > 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. If you have an unusual platform, don't run make install and you have lost nothing... :) -Hollis