[haiku-development] Re: EFI (was: multi-selection semantics)
- From: Ingo Weinhold <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 03:36:35 +0200
On 2007-06-07 at 19:59:15 [+0200], François Revol <revol@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Unfortunately, the boot loader is already using a different method
> > > to
> > > access the boot image - I don't think it would be desirable to have
> > > two
> > > different methods for the same thing, especially when you have to
> > > start
> > > two different servers for serving the image.
> >
> > Yeah, I would simply write a kernel device driver for the protocol I
> > used.
> > The alternative is to add NBD support to the boot loader, but that
> > would
> > require us to add TCP support, too.
>
> There are alternative versions of NBD using UDP IIRC...
> It should be quite easy to add udp support.
> I could dig that one.
That'd be nice.
> > How about the obvious: "network_block_device"?
>
> Could do, usually drivers are for "devices" though :)
On 2007-06-08 at 01:09:01 [+0200], Axel Dörfler <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
[...]
> Now that's a bit redundant, don't you think? But if you want to keep
> remote_disk for the boot loader's protocol only, then I certainly won't
> mind, either.
I don't see why not to call the thing by its name. The protocol is named
Network Block Device, so I'd find it weird to give the driver a different
name. If the "device" in the name was reduntant, just "network_block"
should sound good. It doesn't, though.
CU, Ingo
Other related posts:
