Re: bootxx needs to fit within 0th track of MBR partition?
Greg Troxel <[email protected]> Fri, 25 Aug 2023 08:48:05 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.ports.x86-64,gmane.os.netbsd.ports.i386 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Tobias Nygren <[email protected]> writes: > On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 17:43:16 +0900 > Rin Okuyama <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If not, I will bump BOOTXX_SECTORS for amd64 in few days. > > Would it be on the table to only bump it for HAVE_LLVM to > keep the status quo for official builds? I suppose we could, but either there is a reason to keep the size limited, or there is not. It is really seeming like there is not a reason to keep it where it is, and that 14 sectors (to fit old UFS1) should be fine. > Side note I think there are other issues with boot code built with > clang. For example I've encountered that bootx64.efi hangs for > me when built with clang. Probably the code is buggy then...