Slashdot Mirror
LinuxBIOS Gains Steam
solferino writes: "LinuxJournal has a good overview article about linuxBIOS and where it's currently at (hint : moving like a sleek penguin under arctic ice). Why linuxBIOS? To quote from the article "Currently two different interest groups are working on LinuxBIOS: one working on embedded systems and one building large-scale computer clusters. For these applications the legacy x86 firmware is suboptimal." Yes, this was a slashdot story in March this year but this article is relevant for updating the project status and for providing indepth information."
Moving like a sleek penguin under arctic ice? I'm thinking brave but lost and alone, thousands of miles from his home at the Antipodes, almost certain to starve...is there anything we can do to help? A walkathon? A benefit concert? A herring?
This next song is very sad. Please clap along. -- Robin Zander
As LinuxBIOS currently does not provide a compatibility layer for booting other operating systems besides Linux (notably Windows)...
If OpenSource has a project like this and the comptability is never included, I don't even want to think about what MS could retaliate with...
[quibble]Any penguin under arctic ice is seriously lost. Antarctic ice, certainly. The Falklands, and other land masses of the high southern latitudes, certainly. But not in the Arctic.[/quibble]
That's one nightmare that would not be permitted because of the antitrust suit. It works for Apple, and for XBOX, because the hardware manufacturer can decide what to put in it (so long as they are not a monopoly--IBM got nailed for not allowing third party software, back in the day). But MS is not allowed to do something that would prevent OEM's from installing a different OS.
Even the secure DRM computer mentioned here earlier is likely to limit authentication to authorized OS's (of which Windows is likely to be the only one using x86 hardware), rather than prohibiting unauthenticated OS's from running. Unless that law that requires OS's to be secure gets passed... That would be bad all over, though.
Even Slashdot wants to hide some things
Then run a Transmeta and rewrite their codemorpher as Free Software! There is a final solution to the windows problem.
--The knowledge that you are an idiot, is what distinguishes you from one.
It is no better to be locked into running Linux on a machine than to be locked into running Windows. The BIOS should be a generic facility that can load any desired operating system.
For example I've got a 440LX motherboard with Adaptec SCSI built-in. The 440LX is not supported and there was absolutely no information about the SCSI. It seems like all the new motherboards include RAID controllers... I found no information about these either..
So for the markets they mentioned(embedded, and clusters), this is useful... but I don't see normal users needing this.
Looking for any old 8-bit Heathkit/Zenith software/hardware - http://heathkit.garlanger.com
dictionary.com:
arctic (ärk t k, är t k) adj. Extremely cold; frigid. See Synonyms at cold.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Nor is it that the BIOS is free software--there are other open source BIOS projects that can perform a DOS/Windows boot.
It isn't even that LinuxBIOS is suitable for embedded systems--other free BIOS's will support embedded systems and can perform a DOS/Windows boot.
In any case, there's nothing to stop someone writing a DOS/Windows boot loader and booting it from LinuxBIOS.
The point, surely, is that "LinuxBIOS generally weighs in under 64KB and doesn't waste ROM space with unnecessary functionality. Because it isn't a legacy design, LinuxBIOS starts up fast, even without code optimization."
It really just provides a nice slimmed down boot cycle suitable for embedded systems that do not require the PC BIOS baggage. We're not even talking about manufacturers dropping DOS/Windows compatibility, simply one or two equipment providers considering using LinuxBIOS in situations where compatibility is unnecessary and speed to boot is an important factor.
About all I can say here on that.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Well, if it's "moving like a sleek penguin under arctic ice", it isn't going anywhere, there are no penguins in the Arctic, they are all Antarctic residents. :)
Brett, this is not about hurting Windows, this is all about promoting linux at any cost.
They don't actually CARE about Open Source, just about establishing a NEW default standard *Linux.
When people talk about how *Linux just copied the UNIX API, want to copy the Windows API, or copy program X, you can add copy Microsoft's monopoly position via creating hardware that only runs one OS.
If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
He said it was a good question. His position on it is if it's flashable and programmable, source should be free.
He kind of dodged the question about whether or not his computer BIOS was flashable, free, whatever...
Don't get me wrong, unlike most people, I have a lot of respect for the guy and I don't believe for a second Linux or Open Source would be where it is today without the efforts of him and his team. It's just that there are always little contradictions that trip up even the best of zealots. Like, I wonder if his life is in danger, will he approve of being hooked up to a computer that provides life support but is running non-free software! :-)
Well, many non-PC systems have sophisticated boot ROMs with powerful debugger/monitors built right in. I worked with a VME bus system that had a diagnositic boot ROM that was almost an operating system in itself. You could interactively diagnose bus faults, hardware lockups, all sorts of problems. A powerful boot ROM is wonderful to have in embedded systems. I'd love to see the LinuxBIOS offer the level of power which I've seen in other industrial systems.
I'm surprised nobody posted this link yet:
The Linux Bios Homepage
I can see it now... (delicate fade...)
CT: Gee, we're really getting hammered on these duplicate stories.
Timothy: Yeah, we should do a little more checking. Ah, here comes a submission now. Wow, this is cool! It's Linux! It's a BIOS! Post it, Taco!
CT: Hold on pardner, what did we just talk about?
Timothy: Alright, alright, hold on... aww gee, we posted this back in March! Darn it, this is just so cool, too! It's Linux, it's a BIOS, it's LinuxBIOS!
CT: Calm down, Timmy boy. I tell you what we'll do. We'll link to the original story, and justify this one by calling it an update, with new information.
Timothy: Can we really do that, Taco? That would be great!
CT: Sure. This way, we can't get flamed for re-posting an old story, you get to post a cool article, and all our readers can learn about what's new with LinuxBIOS. Everybody wins!
Timothy: Gosh Taco, you're the greatest.
CT: Just doin' my job, just doin' my job.
(Fade back to reality) And that's how this story was posted.
Can LinuxBIOS be made to boot other operating systems as well? I'd really like to boot BeOS (to the desktop, all services started) in 5 seconds flat. Right now the BIOS takes up the majority of the boot time.
Anyway, why an embedded device would want to use x86 hardware is beyond me...
because it's incredibly cheap maybe, with a mind boggling array of useful peripheral hardwares?
The aim of LinuxBIOS doesn't even remotely touch on some competitive manuevering as you ignorantly suggest.
Installing a LinuxBIOS ROM in place of normal DOS compatible microcode is something you do to modify I>commodity off the shelf hardware hardware to -for example- make your appliance system boot Linux to multiuser + network runlevel from a cold start in 3 seconds or less. It is a very specialized aftermarket improvement for hardware integrators - not motherboard OEMs or PC sellers- and has nothing whatever to do with the kinds of exclusionary practices Microsoft is famous for. It is not practical for general use PC system design, since kernel upgrades mean plugging in a new ROM or reprogramming the old one in a special ROM burner. It is for dedicated appliances only.
In short, Anonymous Coward, if you can't comment intelligently, and without smallminded paranoia, you may want to forgo commenting at all.
Johnny Quest has two Daddies.
1. Initialize all the programmable chips so the board can come up and run.
2. A quick self-test to make sure that everything looks like it's basically working.
3. Offer the option of a more extensive self-test to provide some assurance that weird behavior is not a hardware problem.
4. Load a bootstrap loader from *any* I/O device on the board that might be practical. If the board has an Ethernet interface, it must be able to boot from that. If not, then perhaps from a serial port. This is for initial system installation. Normally you'd boot from the disc controller, of course.
5. Not require any equipment that's not permanently attached to the motherboard, i.e., if you don't know you've got a keyboard and a local video display, then use the Ethernet (preferably) or a serial port for operator control. Load the loader unattended if there's no operator present.
6. A remote reset sure would be nice if you could make sure you could keep it out of the hands of the jokers.
With all that and a 100Mbit Ethernet, the admin could reinstall the officially-approved software on the luser's workstation in a few minutes, without getting out of his own chair, and without having to walk the luser through any complicated procedure like finding the reset button and pressing it, let alone finding some special floppy or CD. And not just luser's workstations, servers, too. once the power and the Ethernet are plugged in you'd never have to turn the lights on in the server room again.
I don't think you read the article. Because the ROM is typically 256K, and the author could not squeeze a kernel down to that size, his code does not use a Linux kernel. Therefore, upgrading the kernel would have no impact on the code in the ROM. Second, there is no need to remove the ROM or use a "special burner". The article specifically mentions that the ROM is re-flashed in place, and onlyl removed if the flash fails.
And it is not just for appliances. The author states that his focus is on compute clusters. I see this as a logical technology for server farms and even managed workstations. I have worked on automating boot and install for servers, and the antiquated BIOS is always a stumbling block. It would be great to have firmware that works with you instead of against you. For example, as mentioned in the article, moving the console to serial and eliminating video hardware.
It seems to me that any independant effort would be wasted writing a new BIOS-like system. My I suggest implementing IEEE Standard 1275-1994 (aka OpenBOOT). Works on Suns, and Macs, it should work for PCs too!
cfs
Does anyone have any information concerning a realtime linuxBIOS system? I think that the PC platform would make a nice, cheap realtime system and RTlinux would work well but wouldn't provide for quick-booting, industrial strength (vibration resistance) and cheapness (diskless). RTlinuxBIOS? It'd be nice if I could put together a PC system with BIOS-level sensor inputs and digital/analog outputs.
Anyone?
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
It is true that anybody that makes a motherboard will test that it runs Windows, but that testing is not going to be very complete and there are many machines that are older than the newest versions of MicroSoft software. I can be pretty sure that if somebody loads WinXP on a machine and it fails, they will blame MicroSoft rather than the unusual BIOS chip in their machine.
So why is this?