On 8/2/10 2:14 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> Not that it is a big issue, just... weird, and annoying --
>> in Debian for example we (re)build boot ROMs during
>> package build instead of using the ones supplied in
>> the source tarball, and
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Not that it is a big issue, just... weird, and annoying --
> in Debian for example we (re)build boot ROMs during
> package build instead of using the ones supplied in
> the source tarball, and currently gpxe isn't packages
> in debian, but e
02.08.2010 20:23, Gianni Tedesco wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-08-01 at 21:27 +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>> I wonder why with etherboot ROMs, the network boot
>>> happens two times (0.12.x), like this:
>>>
>>> -
>>> Starting SeaBIOS (vers
On Sun, 2010-08-01 at 21:27 +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> > I wonder why with etherboot ROMs, the network boot
> > happens two times (0.12.x), like this:
> >
> > -
> > Starting SeaBIOS (version 0.5.1-20100801_125707-gandalf)
> >
> >
On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> I wonder why with etherboot ROMs, the network boot
> happens two times (0.12.x), like this:
>
> -
> Starting SeaBIOS (version 0.5.1-20100801_125707-gandalf)
>
> Booting from virtio-net.zrom 5.4.4 (GPL) ether...
> ROM segment 0xc900 l
I wonder why with etherboot ROMs, the network boot
happens two times (0.12.x), like this:
-
Starting SeaBIOS (version 0.5.1-20100801_125707-gandalf)
Booting from virtio-net.zrom 5.4.4 (GPL) ether...
ROM segment 0xc900 length 0x8000 reloc 0x
Etherboot 5.4.4 (GPL) http://etherboot.o
