Re: Couple quick questions 164Lx milo/aboot/ext3 AlphaBIOS versus SRM
On Wed 19 Mar 2003, Rich Payne wrote:
> > 5) From what I was reading no one is continuing work on Milo but what
> > happened to the source code? I thought, possibly incorrectly, that the
> > milo code was basicly compiled against a kernel version and that keeping
> > it upto date would be relatively simple?
> I'm not a MILO expert, I've stayed away from it as much as possible.
> However I beleive it's tied quite deeply to the kernel, so as kernels
> change MILO has to be updated to handle this. From what I've seen it NOT
> an easy task.
MILO is tied to the kernel insofar that it basically uses driver code
from the kernel source to be able to access SCSI disks, etc. on the
system. There's no relation (at least basically, AFAIK) between the
version of MILO and the kernel that has to be loaded. I think I still
use a MILO based on 2.0.36 or so to load my 2.4 kernel, which works fine
since I don't have any hardware that is needed during boot that is only
recognized by newer kernels (and i.e. newer MILO).
At least, that's my understanding :-)
That said, I do recall that I once needed to get a new MILO exactly for
the reason above: I had reinstalled my root disk and had chosen the
2.2-type of ext2 which MILO didn't understand. I worked around that for
some time by copying the kernel to the same FAT partition as where MILO
itself was stored, and loading that...
Paul Slootman
Reply to: