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

Re: miboot+2.6.12-initrd = success

On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 10:51:38AM +0200, Hans Ekbrand wrote:
> I have succeeded in building a 2.6.12 kernel, using the official
> debian kernel-sources, that fits on miboot floppy and does not need
> any initrd and boots successfully with / on a IDE harddisk.


> A diff from the official /boot/config-2.6.12-1-powerpc-miboot is
> attached.

Could you send me the whole config file, so i can pass it through meld and
examine ? 

> The resulting miboot floppy has 222208 bytes free, so perhaps
> scsi-drivers might also fit.

Indeed, that would be a good thing, since oldworld often have scsi.

> Support for an initrd might be more important though.

i see little chance in that, the smallest initrd image is rather huge, but we
will see.

> The primary motivation was to get something that could be used as a
> rescue disk, possibly by the debian-installer ("make a floppy that
> would boot into debian, if something happens to quik or the boot block
> of the hard disk.", or for systems that quik does not work on).
> Are there interest in support for both initrd and IDE+ext2/ext3 in the
> same miboot kernel?

Yes, definitively, this would allow to do a miboot-installer .udeb for
non-quik supporting oldworlds.

> Would it be more useful to have a common IDE/SCSI miboot kernel but
> without initrd support?

I think so, but then the case of initramfs also allowfs us to do many funny
things whcih may be of interest, in particular build modular stuff, and just
append to the kernel those modules we need.

> Since I have problems with quik and initrd, this kernel is useful in
> combination with quik also.


> There one slight problem though. When booting this kernel from miboot,
> it runs at less than 1/10th of the speed compared to when booted from
> quik.

define "runs" in this context.

> booted by	BogoMIPS
> miboot		  8.19 (lpj=4096)
> quik		105.98 (lpj=52992)
> For rescueing purposes, that doesn't really matter, but I am also
> interested in trying out / on NFS, and for that purpose, "high" speed
> would be nice.

root on NFS is definitively something to loook at here.


Sven Luther

Reply to: