[[RFC] 00/14] Bring in x86 support into 'barebox'
rubini-list at gnudd.com
Thu Dec 10 12:55:28 EST 2009
> This seems like a re-inventing the wheel to me
Sure. But when current wheels are not round, it may be worth the effort.
> There are plenty of bootloaders that will live in the MBR that a
> BIOS can call - Grub, LILO, etc.
lilo has no filesystem support. A pain to replace a kernel in.
grub works but is braindead (I can't understand how could they make it
work, given the quality of code). While I use it for my diskless pc's, it
made me mad more than once.
> and the whole CoreBOOT project
> whose aim is to replace commercial BIOS products.
it's still the bios. A crappy environment, and most people don't want
to risk bricking the pc just to get a bios instead of a bios.
> I would have thought effort would be better focussed on other architectures.
While I would never have done that myself, and in general I agree with
you, if the internal design of barebox allows a bios-hosted
environment, such an effort is more than welcome, and I'm eager to
test it and say bye to grub as soon as possible.
Some tech friends tell me "you don't port u-boot to the pc for
political reasons, you morons". So I really thank Juergen for this,
but also because it might even make the PC a better place to work
And yes, I agree with Mike Frysinger too.
More information about the u-boot-v2