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

Re: distribution of 2.4.x source for PPC (Re: Install on UATA)



Tom Rini wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 02:50:05PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 03:13:39PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 01:14:42PM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > > coff images are still useful for booting oldworlds no?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, but they just aren't 'zImage.pmac'.  I couldn't decide
> > > > which of the 3 to point to.
> > >
> > > is there a better image for booting directly via OF on oldworld now?
> > > if so use that instead.  you should provide only:
> > >
> > > 1: an image suitable for standard bootloaders: yaboot, quik
> > > 2: an image suitable for booting directly via OF: ??
> > >
> > > 1: is the priority, 2 is not so important, just a would be handy.
> > > (esp for bootfloppies, perhaps).
> >
> > And don't forget also an image bootable on apus.
> 
> Er, someone else will have to do that.

Are we talking about integrating APUS in the powerpc kernel-image packages
here? I'm the maintainer of the -apus package. I thought about integrating but
figured it might not work out too well because APUS needs an additional patch
which might delay things.

> APUS is currently broken in the main tree, and I haven't seen the patch
> (pointers, please!) to what makes it work again.

The canonical source for APUS is the CVS tree at SourceForge.

> If it's still 'vmapus' I think I remember what I tried to do for 'em...

Changing that should be rather easy, I hacked around that a bit for the 2.4.4
package.


> > what we really need there is just a plain gzipped vmlinux file, since
> > there are no boot loader only ami/apus boot.
> 
> Would it be too much to have the gzip'ing happen later?  quik/yaboot want
> it ungzip'ed...

I don't see a problem there.


-- 
Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)    \   Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer
CS student, Free Software enthusiast   \        XFree86 and DRI project member



Reply to: