From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <32a656c204111722042b60b689@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:04:39 +0900
From: Vester Thacker <vester.thacker@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] pc boot and ether drivers
In-Reply-To: <90434074e615c95c1ad55afb9f6687eb@plan9.bell-labs.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <ee9e417a041117200113ea6134@mail.gmail.com>
	<90434074e615c95c1ad55afb9f6687eb@plan9.bell-labs.com>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 06608646-eace-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 23:53:23 -0500, jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com
<jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote:
> 
> By 'rewriting the bootstrap altogether' I would make it go away
> altogether and use the kernel to boot another kernel. We can do this
> already but some of the details are a bit messy and a tidy up and
> re-organisation would be a good idea; this is likely to fall out
> of something else I hope to be doing soon. How you get the first
> (bootstrap) kernel into memory could be the same as now, using
> whatever methods you like - Plan 9 MBR/PBS, Grub, LILO, LinuxBIOS,
> PXE, whatever.
> 
> On Wed Nov 17 20:29:00 EST 2004, ericvh@gmail.com wrote:
> > ...
> > We have enough to do without having to worry about
> > writing boot loaders.
> >
> >           -eric
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed Nov 17 23:01:38 EST 2004, russcox@gmail.com wrote:
> > the boot process is crappy enough.
> > let's not make it crappier.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> --jim
> 

Sorry to be the one to say this, but to me that comes off like "don't
futz with code until we get our projects done". Where is the openness
in that?  Maybe it's just me. I'll drop the subject.

-vester