Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 15:29:03 +0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> To: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf Makefile.i386 Message-ID: <199901080729.PAA40072@spinner.netplex.com.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 07 Jan 1999 11:52:29 PST." <Pine.BSF.3.95.990107114947.3875C-100000@current1.whistle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer wrote: > I strongly believe that the elf kernel should have a different name.. > e.g. /FreeBSD > this will ensure that only new bootblocks will find it and old bootblocks > will find the old kernel lying about. > this may save some people some grief. > > julian > > linking /kernel as another name of /loader would allow old bootblocks to > keep working. At the risk of inflaming this again, you mentioned 1996 bootblocks.. As I understand it, bootblocks that old cannot start up /boot/loader, no matter what it's called. I don't have any bootblocks this old, so I'm going on hearsay. I would really like to know why this happens, I hear that it's something to do with the way btxld constructs the empty symbol table or something. As a concession to Julian, he does have a point. If we installed the new kernel in (say) /boot/kernel (or /modules/kernel) where the bootloader will find it but the old bootblocks will not, there is no chance that people will blow their feet off by replacing /kernel with something that is unbootable. In that scenario, the worst that can happen if they don't upgrade bootblocks is that they will reboot and get their old kernel again. Incidently, I'd like to get those kernels out of /... Cheers, -Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901080729.PAA40072>