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

Bug#315592: RFH aboot (Alpha bootloader): Looking for co-maintainers



Hi Helge,

> 
> Great. Since I am not a DD, I will inform Steve Langasek, who did the
> uploads and helped me a great deal with all the packaging details.
> 
> The first thing you can do is to check out our CVS from alioth
> (pkg-aboot). I'll ask Steve to add you to the group and get a little
> aqauinted with the source layout. Please ask if something is unclear,
> ... I cannot tell you the nitty gritty source details, but the overall
> layout and the purpose of the various tools/directories etc. I know. 
> 
> Out of the bugs, I'd consider #270801 the most anyoing. Unfortunately,
> netabootwrap is not in the upstream source, hence we are "on our own".

Ok. Do I get it right that aboot doesn't display any messages at all ?
(not even 'aboot: Linux/Alpha SRM bootloader version ') ?

> For #153176 and #222904 I tried to collect as much info as possible,
> and also talked to upstream, but there is no solution yet. Please see
> the logs. 
> 

Ok. I will look into this.

> If you know how to add other FS, then #153666 might be fun for you.
> Upstream is a little reluctant, though, to add more and more file
> systems. Since a patch is available, the next thing would be to test,
> if possible, and add it in the next upload which could deal with the
> new policy version as well (haven't looked yet, what this would
> require).
> 

I have done (am doing this) for other bootloaders. Should be doable for
aboot as well.

> Suggestions for #271180 are welocme as well.
> 

I think it might be good to interpret booted_osflags the same way for
netboot then for disk/cd boot. Ie as the aboot.conf entry to use for
booting. This would require a small aboot.conf to be included in the
netboot image.

> A very important thing is, though, to keep aboot buildable (by
> having machines to build and test on). 
> 

Yep. Although SRM seems to be a reasonably well behaved firmware in my
experience.

> And finally, I have the upstream e-mail adresses and can try to get
> them working on it again. And documentation fixes I can submit both
> for Debian as upstream (sourceforge) as well.
> 

Ok.

Cheers,

Peter (p2).

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: