[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#587886: future of maintaining of the bootloader LILO



Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote on 2010-07-05 15:23:
> 
> I've caught up on all of this now.  I'm not sure I quite understand
> the position of the current lilo maintainers.  In
>     http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2010/05/msg00769.html 
> William writes:
> 
>   it has pretty much been determined that kernel sizes have crossed the
>   line past where lilo can reliably determine the payload size.

Because I had not understand this statement in the pointed email I made
some tests and searched through the source code. Yesterday I have made my
last test on an amd64 architecture with the recent kernel and a special
made initrd (with over 1000 large kernel modules):
   kernel size =  2,4 MByte
   initrd size = 25,0 MByte
and the lilo option 'large-memory'. Result of this test with lilo: 
This kernel+initrd is installable and bootable without problems!

My results of these work:
Lilo don't have any problems with the kernel + initrd size. If the
'large-memory' option is set this will be done without warnings and if
this option is not set it will be done correctly but with warnings!

Have a nice day,

Joachim (Germany)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: