OESF Portables Forum

Everything Else => Zaurus Distro Support and Discussion => Distros, Development, and Model Specific Forums => Archived Forums => Debian => Topic started by: judecn on December 11, 2007, 12:28:41 am

Title: U-boot Vs Sharp Bootloaders
Post by: judecn on December 11, 2007, 12:28:41 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.

Title: U-boot Vs Sharp Bootloaders
Post by: malik on December 11, 2007, 06:19:23 am

Quote from: judecn

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

Title: U-boot Vs Sharp Bootloaders
Post by: koen on December 11, 2007, 06:34:59 am

you don't need uboot for that: http://linuxtogo.org/gowiki/AngstromAndCacko (http://linuxtogo.org/gowiki/AngstromAndCacko)

Title: U-boot Vs Sharp Bootloaders
Post by: malik on December 11, 2007, 11:25:04 am

Quote from: koen

you don't need uboot for that: http://linuxtogo.org/gowiki/AngstromAndCacko (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.

Title: U-boot Vs Sharp Bootloaders
Post by: koen on December 11, 2007, 12:14:30 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: [Select]

"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.

Title: U-boot Vs Sharp Bootloaders
Post by: judecn on December 11, 2007, 03:33:57 pm

Quote from: koen

you don't need uboot for that: http://linuxtogo.org/gowiki/AngstromAndCacko (http://linuxtogo.org/gowiki/AngstromAndCacko)

That's exactly what I needed to do.  Many thanks!

Title: U-boot Vs Sharp Bootloaders
Post by: malik on December 12, 2007, 04:47:44 am

Quote from: koen

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: [Select]

"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:-)