another bootloader

[mcheung63]

hi all, if u are not using grub, can u tell me what bootloader you use? i tried some other bootloader, but are to compile them in linux
thanks
from Peter ([email protected])

[Antti]

I use my own boot loaders:

- "Legacy Hardware", booting from USB drive or CD
- UEFI, booting from USB drive or CD

These are not general purpose bootloaders. I thought it would be easier to have custom-made boot loaders than try to "hack" GRUB (or similar) to do what I wanted. Also, now I am the only one to be blamed if the system does not work.

[bluemoon]

I wrote my custom boot loader. Like all software, depends on your requirements a boot loader can be quite simple or extremely difficult.

So you should list out your requirement, and see if there is already something on the market you would use, or decide write one yourself.

[MollenOS]

I wrote my own custom FAT32 bootloader. I'd rather have full control of the boot sequence than let GRUB do it. =]

[egos]

I use my own boot loaders and GRUB:

• MBR (stage 0): Alter, Jumbo;
• stage 1: FAT12 (for floppies), FAT12/16, FAT32, CDFS, foreign NTFS boot loader from OS Boot Tools (kernel, ramfs driver and ramfs image are packed into kernel.sys; while I have no NTFS support);
• stage 2: Boot, modified GRUB, GRUB/GRUB2 (usually they are used only for "Multiple versions on single volume" configurations).

[qw]

I also wrote my own boot loader. It is not very sophisticated: it runs from FAT12 formatted volumes only, loads some file at a fixed address and jumps there. It is however smart enough to search the entire root directory and load the file through the FAT, not from some fixed cluster number.

[mcheung63]

you guys are genius, thanks for introducing me OSBootTool

[mariaw]

I'm using a custom written pxe loader, I only discovered there were freely available loaders with source after i'd already gotten it booting up satisfactorily. The boot process on the x86 seems like a right pain, though the only things I have to compare it to at this level is MC68030 and ARM where my code was in EEPROM, which hardly counts.

netbooting over pxe is good for now since it's just hit ctrl+alt+delete to test a new compile, but when I come to booting from a local disk I'll most likely use the syslinux source code as a starting point and make the needed changes to load what I need to, the source code seems very well organized so i'd suggest you try that if you have specialized needs which I figure you do since most people seem to use just grub otherwise.

[egos]

Yes, PXE boot loader is convenient for testing system on real hardware during development. But I can't run full function system through net booting because it doesn't support net connection. I'm compelled to use a limited configuration with ramfs driver and small built-in ramfs image as on NTFS volumes (see above).

Syslinux is not better than GRUB. It uses same booting technology as GRUB (stage 1 boots first sector of stage 2 then booted code boots resting extents of stage 2). I even would tell that in GRUB this technology is implemented better. But I prefer when stage 1 boots stage 2 (or kernel) as a file. Because of it I usually use modified GRUB (where GRUB's stage2 is booted as a file).