On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, David Lang wrote:
> Given the option I would rather have the config there, unless we can have
> both.....
The location of the boot logo in the kernel image has nothing to do with
such being a config option.
If the boot logo is separate from the ELF kernel image itself, that
makes it easier for external programs to modify the boot logo without
having to recompile the kernel.
I am imagining a patch which would add something to the final stages of
the link process:
cat vmlinuz.gz mybootlogo.signature mybootlogo.img > foo
mv foo vmlinuz.gz
Obviously this is simplified greatly but you get the idea.
Jeff
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> > Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 09:34:38 -0600 (CST)
> > From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@mandrakesoft.mandrakesoft.com>
> > To: David Odin <David.Odin@bigfoot.com>
> > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
> > Subject: Re: 2.3.41 and TNT2 fbcon
> >
> > On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, David Odin wrote:
> > > Actually, I can't have a logos with more than 384 lines in height. I still
> > > don't understand why. But I'm working on a utility (DrakeLogo) which let
> > > anybody to easily change the boot logo. You still have to recompile the kernel
> > > though...
> >
> > We can do better than that :) We can tack the boot logo onto the end of
> > the kernel/initrd image or similar.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> >
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 07 2000 - 21:00:09 EST