Re: [Etherboot-developers] pxe

[H. P. A. <hp...@zy...>]

prl...@sy... wrote:
>>I believe that is also the case for FreeBSD.  Though I am not
>>terribly fond of the way FreeBSD support is currently built.  There
>>is no future proofing in there.
> 
> 
> Open source should not depend on PXE.
> 
> 
>>Given the holes in the implementation calling it emulation is
>>probably a fair description.  But then again given the holes
>>in the PXE spec/practice we might qualify as implementing it.
> 
> 
> The implementation may be incomplete - but one *emulates* something
> else. My point was that Etherboot would not "emulate" PXE or be somehow
> "artifical" or suboptimal - quite the opposite...
> 
> Bochs, for instance, does not "emulate" BIOS calls - it implements them,
> just as Award does. It may frequently sit on top of emulated "hardware",
> but that's different - put it on ADLO and LinuxBIOS and I think it is
> fair to say that there is no "emulation" going on, or at least no more
> than a "normal" BIOS on the mobo.
> 

The best phrasing would be that Etherboot would implement a PXE subset. 
  Eventually it might implement the full spec, but that is a large effort.

	-hpa