Thread: [Etherboot-developers] World domination, anyone?
Brought to you by:
marty_connor,
stefanhajnoczi
Menu
▾
▴
etherboot-developers
|
From: Marty C. <md...@et...> - 2003-04-24 18:26:42
|
Hello Everyone,
I've been thinking about additions to Etherboot, and thinking about
some of the recent discussions we've had, and thought I'd start a
thread to discuss what new directions people think are valuable. With
the recent architecture and infrastructure improvements that Eric has
worked so hard on, we have a springboard for some exciting new
additions.
I'll start by listing some of the things that personally come to mind:
o USB support
o PCMCIA support
o UNDI driver
o PXE Support
Of the list, I think the last two interest me the most right now. We've
talked about them for some time. The NILO project was working on a free
PXE implementation, and there is some code there.
The recent messages about getting PXELINUX to work with Etherboot
sounded like fun. The UNDI driver discussion seemed interesting as
well, though I need Peter or Vasil to explain how it works -- one more
time :)
But what do you think? If we went for PXE or UNDI, where are the big
wins? I'm always thinking about ways Etherboot could be used by more
people, and how we could become even more useful as a component
technology.
Btw, this is much more than of theoretical interest. I'd like to see us
implement something really cool for LinuxWorld Expo SF in August, and I
may be able to swing some limited funding for some of this.
Ok, so go ahead. What do you think would be cool to do? Could you do
it? Do you know who could or would? And, most importantly, would it
bring us closer to WoRLd DomINatIoN? ;)
Marty
--
Try: http://rom-o-matic.net/ to make Etherboot images instantly.
Name: Marty Connor
US Mail: Entity Cyber, Inc.; P.O. Box 391827;
Cambridge, MA 02139; USA
Voice: (617) 491-6935; Fax: (617) 491-7046
Email: md...@et...
Web: http://www.etherboot.org/
|
|
From: Anselm M. H. <an...@ho...> - 2003-04-24 18:51:34
|
Hello Marty, Thursday, April 24, 2003, 8:26:39 PM, you wrote: > I've been thinking about additions to Etherboot, and thinking about > some of the recent discussions we've had, and thought I'd start a > thread to discuss what new directions people think are valuable. With > the recent architecture and infrastructure improvements that Eric has > worked so hard on, we have a springboard for some exciting new > additions. As you talk about it - something I had in mind the last days, as my PC needs a reinstall anyway :-) AFAIK there is some disk support there already. If one could tell etherboot not to DHCP but have a standard filename argument (e.g. pointing to a partition where a menu file is stored on), that again could trampoline us to any partition boot - just a bootmanager then. This is just an idea (so don't beat me please) - I think etherboot could be altered as it accepts a default filename; if that starts with dsk:// (or what was it? Have been away from it too long), no network stuff is necessary. If that file's a menu, by returning a network filename, network boot could be started at the second step, with a predefined filename. This could be reasonable in cases where there is a disk anyway and only very randomly network boot is needed - as I wrote, only an idea. Probably this needed proper filesystem support, so much to difficult in reality. > But what do you think? If we went for PXE or UNDI, where are the big > wins? I'm always thinking about ways Etherboot could be used by more > people, and how we could become even more useful as a component > technology. I'm not sure what PXE means exactly. I thought up to now, etherboot can be loaded by PXE, unloads the PXE stack, loads its own drivers for the card and does its stuff as usual - correct me if wrong. Would "PXE support" mean instead of unloading the PXE stack using it - as consequence, any PXE hardware would be supported? > Btw, this is much more than of theoretical interest. I'd like to see us > implement something really cool for LinuxWorld Expo SF in August Pity SF is just a third of the way round the earth from here and RyanAir cheap flights are inner-European only :-( > Ok, so go ahead. What do you think would be cool to do? Could you do > it? Do you know who could or would? And, most importantly, would it > bring us closer to WoRLd DomINatIoN? ;) LiNuX rulez anyway. Who needs world domination? Quite a to great risk someone doesn't like my face and sends his Marines for me ;-= The last German to have those dreams coming partly true had birthday quite yesterday, ya know? (Some neighbours like to celebrate that day, very unlike me of course) I'm in work up to the ears right now, but that's not to last more than a week or three. I'd prefer honestly more than adding features myself doing something in the docs - they seemed quite not to be uptodate at some places. But - there was a mailing some days ago that someone worked on them, wasn't it? What's the status over there? Greetings, Anselm |
|
From: <ebi...@ln...> - 2003-04-24 23:46:11
|
Marty Connor <md...@et...> writes:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> I've been thinking about additions to Etherboot, and thinking about some of the
> recent discussions we've had, and thought I'd start a thread to discuss what new
>
> directions people think are valuable. With the recent architecture and
> infrastructure improvements that Eric has worked so hard on, we have a
> springboard for some exciting new additions.
>
> I'll start by listing some of the things that personally come to mind:
>
And a few more off the top of my head and from the discussion.
o Other architectures?
o Update the Docmuentation
o Multicast support in more drivers
o Smaller ROM footprint
(Decompress and relocate and free memory < 1MB)
> o USB support
> o PCMCIA support
> o UNDI driver
> o PXE Support (FREEBSD_PXEEMU)
> Of the list, I think the last two interest me the most right now. We've talked
> about them for some time. The NILO project was working on a free PXE
> implementation, and there is some code there.
If the current code could be made to compile there would be a lot
more incentive to do the incremental steps needed to make it useable.
> The recent messages about getting PXELINUX to work with Etherboot sounded like
> fun. The UNDI driver discussion seemed interesting as well, though I need Peter
> or Vasil to explain how it works -- one more time :)
>
> But what do you think? If we went for PXE or UNDI, where are the big wins?
Improving PXEEMU to the point of usability without complicating the rest of the
code (as looks possible) is a risk mitigation thing. If you already use PXE
you can switch to etherboot and all of your old setup can still work.
In addition a really good PXEEMU might be able to replace a vendors version
without qualms.
> I'm
> always thinking about ways Etherboot could be used by more people, and how we
> could become even more useful as a component technology.
>
> Btw, this is much more than of theoretical interest. I'd like to see us
> implement something really cool for LinuxWorld Expo SF in August, and I may be
> able to swing some limited funding for some of this.
One nice thing is to work on etherboot.zdsk or etherboot-pci.zdsk. And
have it print out the driver you need to build to support your NIC.
I think we have enough information in etherboot to do that now.
> Ok, so go ahead. What do you think would be cool to do? Could you do it? Do you
> know who could or would? And, most importantly, would it bring us closer to
> WoRLd DomINatIoN? ;)
Eric
|
