Re: [bug] 2.6.0 COMMAND_LINE_SIZE <160???

[Randy.Dunlap]

On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 18:11:54 +0800 (SGT) Jeff Chua <jeffchua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

| 
| On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
| 
| > On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 21:07:45 +0800 (SGT) Jeff Chua <jeffchua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| >
| > Same processor arch. type in both .config files?
| > Same compiler version building them?
| 
| Same for both.
| 
| gcc 2.95.3 20010315
| glibc-2.2.5-34
| 
| perhaps, it's loadlin or linld problem, or fat32 problem. The difference
| is lilo doesn't need _dos_ to boot.

Just curious, what kind of disk/OS config do you have where
using loadlin (or linld) is useful?  Does it have anything to do
with not writing (updating) the MBR on disk?
Are there some booting alternatives for you?

Is Linux on the same hard disk as Windows (or DOS)?

| I tried to replace ./arch/i386/boot/setup.S with the one from 2.4.24-pre1
| and it seems to go further before it breaks.

Yes, not much difference in those source files.

| What's next to debug this?

Good question.  I'm not sure.  Anyone else have suggestions?

--
~Randy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/