Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] reenable pygrub build

[Christian Limpach <Christian.Limpach@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 08:06:44PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Christian Limpach wrote:
> > I think this is a very poor solution.  Doesn't the name bzImage imply
> > that the image includes a bootsector? 
> 
> On the contrary, the kernel that contained a boot image was
> zImage - the bzImage (or big zImage) was for kernels too big
> to boot that way.

Hmm, you're saying the bzImage file on a regular ARCH=i386 build
doesn't include a bootsector?  Doesn't include code to decompress
itself?

Seems to me that calling our vmlinuz bzImage is rather confusing...

> > I don't see how we will be able to justify adoption of this hack when we 
> > merge xen support into arch/i386...
> 
> I don't see how Xenolinux as a subarch of i386 could get away
> with NOT having the same build target as other i386 subarchs.

Because we are building something substantially different?

    christian


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel