 U-boot Vs Sharp Bootloaders, Advantages and Disadvantages? |
OESF Forums > Distros, Development, and Model Specific Forums > Distro Support and Discussion > Debian  |
 Dec 10 2007, 09:28 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 11 Joined: 25-November 07 Member No.: 20,984  |
Hello,
I'm currently running Debian EABI on my C1000 from a 4gb SDHC card with some success, but I'm using Sharp's original bootloader with Angstrom's 10302007 kernel and modules. I've heard that U-Boot is supposed to be "better," but I've never heard how. Are there advantages to using U-Boot over Sharp's traditional bootloader? Is it true that with U-Boot, I don't have to continuously re-flash the ROM to update the kernel (i.e. with U-Boot, can I boot into a kernel on an SD card?) Thanks in advance. |
 |
 
|
|
Dec 11 2007, 03:19 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 150 Joined: 8-December 04 Member No.: 5,839 |
QUOTE(judecn @ Dec 11 2007, 05:28 AM)  Hello, I'm currently running Debian EABI on my C1000 from a 4gb SDHC card with some success, but I'm using Sharp's original bootloader with Angstrom's 10302007 kernel and modules. I've heard that U-Boot is supposed to be "better," but I've never heard how. Are there advantages to using U-Boot over Sharp's traditional bootloader? Is it true that with U-Boot, I don't have to continuously re-flash the ROM to update the kernel (i.e. with U-Boot, can I boot into a kernel on an SD card?) Thanks in advance. hello, can you run alternatively a sharprom/cacko from nand? to the others: is this possible using the setting uboot/yongun/eabi system? this would be great: running an eabi system on sd, a stable sharprom from nand and using in my case the hd as a common disk... thanx in advance |
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2007, 03:34 AM
Post
#3
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 1,014 Joined: 4-January 05 From: Enschede, The Netherlands Member No.: 6,107 |
you don't need uboot for that: http://linuxtogo.org/gowiki/AngstromAndCacko
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2007, 08:25 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 150 Joined: 8-December 04 Member No.: 5,839 |
QUOTE(koen @ Dec 11 2007, 11:34 AM) you don't need uboot for that: http://linuxtogo.org/gowiki/AngstromAndCacko i want to use cacko as my main system and wish to run angstrom/debian/etc natively. a bootloader should give me the choice, kexec runs within angstrom. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2007, 09:14 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 1,014 Joined: 4-January 05 From: Enschede, The Netherlands Member No.: 6,107 |
kexec *boots* a new kernel, it does not "run within" something else. Please do some research before posting crappy FUD here.
From the freaking *first* link google gives on "kexec" CODE "Some machines have BIOSes that are either extremely slow to reboot,
or that cannot reliably perform a reboot. In which case kexec may be the only alternative to reboot in a reliable and timely manner. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2007, 12:33 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 11 Joined: 25-November 07 Member No.: 20,984 |
QUOTE(koen @ Dec 11 2007, 03:34 AM) you don't need uboot for that: http://linuxtogo.org/gowiki/AngstromAndCacko That's exactly what I needed to do. Many thanks! |
|
|
|
|
Dec 12 2007, 01:47 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 150 Joined: 8-December 04 Member No.: 5,839 |
QUOTE(koen @ Dec 11 2007, 06:14 PM) kexec *boots* a new kernel, it does not "run within" something else. Please do some research before posting crappy FUD here. From the freaking *first* link google gives on "kexec" CODE "Some machines have BIOSes that are either extremely slow to reboot, or that cannot reliably perform a reboot. In which case kexec may be the only alternative to reboot in a reliable and timely manner. @koen> sorry for that and thanx for googling for me, you are my man:-) |
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 23rd May 2013 - 05:10 PM |