Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932264AbVIJIB2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Sep 2005 04:01:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932267AbVIJIB1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Sep 2005 04:01:27 -0400 Received: from dsl027-180-204.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([216.27.180.204]:57747 "EHLO outer-richmond.davemloft.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932264AbVIJIB1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Sep 2005 04:01:27 -0400 Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 01:01:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20050910.010114.28468998.davem@davemloft.net> To: maillist@jg555.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Pure 64 bootloaders From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <43228E4E.4050103@jg555.com> References: <43228E4E.4050103@jg555.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 4.2 on Emacs 21.4 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 749 Lines: 19 From: Jim Gifford Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 00:42:06 -0700 > So for my question, why does a bootloader have to be 32bit? > Anyone got 64 bit bootloaders for Sparc or x86_64 machines? You can make SILO 64-bit, but it would just be a lot of work and would just result in a SILO that, unlike current SILO, would only work on UltraSPARC machines. 32-bit SILO, on the other hand, can work on any Sparc system. There really is no advantage, and known disadvantages, to making SILO 64-bit. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/