Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Apr 1998 22:31:43 +0200 (MET DST) | From | Gerard Roudier <> | Subject | Re: 2.1.93.. |
| |
On Thu, 16 Apr 1998, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
> EXECUTIVE SUMMARY > > The BIOS' order is more important than any other order because > the BIOS' order can't be changed unless you change the BIOS itself, > which might require a board swap in some cases. You just have to > accept that as a fact of life.
Since there is nothing in Linux that ensures that devices are numbered according to the _actual_ BIOSes order, any tool based on such an assumption is essentially broken.
> MORE DETAILS > > There is an ordered set <1, 2, ...> of controllers seen by the > BIOS. When LILO tell the BIOS to read the kernel image, it has to > tell the BIOS which controller (host adaptor), which disk (LUN), and > which sectors to read.
LILO works most of the time because most of users only have IDE only or IDE and a single SCSI adapter. Even assuming IDE then SCSI order is broken since: - Some BIOSes allows to boot from SCSI when IDE + SCSI is present. - What about some other subtleties of set-up programs as: * Setting devices that boots and those that does'nt. * Reverse scanning SCSI devices. * Booting from CD/ROM.
I am not a LILO expert, but probably LILO allows to force the BIOS device number also. Does it?
Regards, Gerard.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |