From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: lost.goblin@gmail.com Received: by 10.236.111.11 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 21:52:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <465c3dee5214fb863d6b53f708cea33e@gmx.de> References: <465c3dee5214fb863d6b53f708cea33e@gmx.de> Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 06:52:08 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: kOf6UaQnz6YjDcCAkSGJ1q9uqUA Message-ID: Subject: Re: difference cdrom boot and 9fat boot? From: Uriel To: 9front@googlegroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Just a few useless (and unusually happy) comments. On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:39 AM, wrote: > this is really wired... the iso and fat bootloaders (we > dont use 9load) share most of the code except filesystem > specific stuff. > > maybe someone forgot to rebuild these? what iso did you > download? We need a more clear ISO-blessing process, yes, it is 'bureaucracy', but people need to know what the fuck they are downloading and which are the latest official bits. > the bootloader allows you to break into a interactive prompt. > > try hitting enter or space just after bios until you see the > ">" prompt so you can read the parameters. I knew this, but still makes me so happy that at last it is done. > the 9pcf kernel on the cdrom and the kernel installed are exactly > the same. you can use the booted kernel from the cdrom to > mount and boot into your installed system by specifying > your install partition on the bootargs prompt. And *fuck yea* for this, that BL never managed to do this is a disgrace, yay for one kernel to rule them all! uriel