From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 06:46:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 06:46:04 -0400 Received: from imo-d08.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.40]:14758 "EHLO imo-d08.mx.aol.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 8 Sep 2001 06:46:02 -0400 From: Floydsmith@aol.com Message-ID: <51.10cc64a8.28cb50f8@aol.com> Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 06:46:16 EDT Subject: Re2: LOADLIN and 2.4 kernels To: tegeran@home.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org CC: Floydsmith@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 14 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> >Hi everyone, >> > >> >I got a bug report of LOADLIN not working with recent -ac kernels, and >> >thought it might have something to do with my recent A20 changes that >> >were added to -ac. However, in trying to reproduce this bug, I have >> >been completely unable to boot *any* 2.4 kernel with LOADLIN-1.6, >> > trying this from Win98 DOS mode. >> > >> >Anyone have any insight into this? I really don't understand how the >> >A20 changes could affect LOADLIN, and it's starting to look to me that >> >there is some other problem going on... >> > >> > -hpa >> > > > >> loads the 2.4.x kernel into a buffer. The kernel then attempts boot >> just the "boot" sector stuff. This again probes for the total amount of >> system ram (64MB). But, because of the much greater size of 2.4.x >> kernels some memory location that himem uses (I think - maybe BIOS >Sounds like something booting to Safe Mode Command Prompt Only would fix, >as opposed to booting to plain command prompt mode >command prompt mode will load some drivers (such as himem), better not to >load them when using LOADLIN. Safe Mode Command Prompt Only boots >straight to the command prompt, very similar to setting init to /bin/sh >for a completely bare single-user mode. Yes, indeed, not loading himem does solve the problem I had. But, do to the fact that I need extented memory (for a DOS ramdisk) and for some TSR(s) (like smartdrv) for a LS-120 boot disk I use as both a Linux and DOS "rescue" disk, I need "himem". Floyd,