maemo.org - Talk - N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)

- Maemo 5 / Fremantle (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=40)

- - N900 kernel v45, why with uboot??? (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=65644)

Re: N900 what it has to be, without uboot crap

Uboot has worked perfectly for me. I think it's the best thing since sliced bread.

Re: N900 what it has to be, without uboot crap

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobbieThe1st (Post 874620)

@lunat:
Bootmenu-n900 is more of just a loader, It doesn't mess with the kernel.
As it is, I think my app is just about the only thing that uses it really - Perhaps one ubuntu-on-n900 setup, but that's about it.

i didn't say it messes with the kernel. i said it hooks into preinit and turns the maemo bootprocess upside down. nice, great idea if you have no bootloader doing this. but not realy sane.

whats that fussing with the kernel thing about?
if you flash a kernel in the nand you fuss around with the kernel. you have to replace it.
with uboot on the other hand you can leave the original(working) kernel in place - no need to deinstall . so its quite the other way round. uboot stops the messing arround with the kernel.

i think you are still fixiated to the idea that the kernel has to be in the nand. no it has not! it can be in any place.

EDIT: if you say chainloading one bootloader from another is also not the nicest approach, i agree with you. nolo should be replaced: unfortunately i don't see that comming(to much stuff hidden in nolo). so with that chainloading is the 2nd best solution.
EDIT2: not kexecing to a different kernel if you use the preinit is imo a problem for the maemo kernel is made to work with all the closed stuff in maemo. if you don't have it, it's incomplete... and so ... better leave it as it is and if you want something different so do start something different and not begin with one thing and turn half ways round to do something else.

Re: N900 what it has to be, without uboot crap

Quote:

Originally Posted by iDont (Post 873871)

You've missed the point of extras-devel.
Also, see Titan's post (includes instructions to downgrade kernel-power)

I didn't miss titans post about downgrading to v42. Also i'm aware of the extra's develop repos. But i prefer to let people choose if they want uboot or not. Titans kernel has a lot of improvements of the stock kernel. So let end-users use this kernel, but make it not more complicated than it already is. Some people are "just using" their device, others are pushing their device to the limits.

Re: N900 what it has to be, without uboot crap

Quote:

Originally Posted by N900@900MHz (Post 874741)

what is this thing about not having a choice. just don't install it or do it if you know it is instable not working stuff from dev: thats a choice isn't it?

what you realy do is trying to enforce a decicion for others not to have the choice of using a surperior bootloader. and further demanding that decision should be based on comparison of a software that is not stable, explicitely under developement, with one that is stable and making the instability, beeing under developement as the critaria. thus completly ignoring that the criteria you base your demanded decision on only is a good reason for not having it in stable - which is the case.

edit:*realy* devel is a very clear name and if there /was/ something in it that would destroy your phone: i'd say, well, bad luck, thanks for finding the bug and sacrificing your device for a good purpose.

Re: N900 what it has to be, without uboot crap

Quote:

Originally Posted by N900@900MHz (Post 874741)

You've misread my reply.

I said you've missed the point about the extras-devel repository, not Titan's post. I quoted you saying 'most of the users want a stable custom kernel'. Well, then don't use the one from extras-devel. The link to Titan's post was just there to confirm what I was saying.