From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N3vVY-0007kB-33 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:43:28 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N3vVT-0007dq-BE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:43:27 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41002 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1N3vVT-0007df-4i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:43:23 -0400 Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.153]:49369) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N3vVS-0001Qw-N4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:43:22 -0400 Received: from d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.107]) by e35.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n9UHW0Dq013902 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:32:00 -0600 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id n9UHhEK6113612 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:43:14 -0600 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id n9UHf9Bg026546 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:41:09 -0600 Message-ID: <4AEB25B1.8040709@us.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:43:13 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4AEB1F84.4010400@siemens.com> In-Reply-To: <4AEB1F84.4010400@siemens.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: Regression due to "Fall back to network boot..." List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: qemu-devel Jan Kiszka wrote: > [ What happened to the scm commit list, btw?] > I need to move it to qemu.org. > Hi Anthony, > > your patch 94ca5a9859 prevents booting PCs unless some boot order of > less than 4 devices is explicitly specified. The reason is > > #define PC_MAX_BOOT_DEVICES 3 > > and the CMOS-based interface to the BIOS. Maybe the latter can be > enhanced so that the former can be increased, but for now reverting this > commit is probably better. > Sorry about that. I swore I tested it and it seemed like such a simple change. It's now reverted. > Jan > > -- Regards, Anthony Liguori