[Gllug] Installing Linux on a Mac Mini - boot sequence

[John Hearns]

2009/9/5 Richard Jones <rich at annexia.org>:

> On Intel-based Macs, OpenFirmware is *not* used, and the "OF"
> combination does *not* work.  Instead it uses EFI, which is some Intel
> thing and in my experience quite obscure.  There doesn't seem to be
> any command line.  This is also the system used on Itanic.  The best
> thing I can say about EFI is it's newer than the BIOS system.

Rich, it is extremely unfair to colour people's perceptions like that,
based on what you admit is little knowledge.
EFI is indeed used on IA64 systems, and is superior to the BIOS system.
It is not 'quite obscure' and is well documented. I use it every day.

It indeed does have a command line, from which you can not only launch
your OS but also diagnostic processes - imagine being able to run
comprehensive memory diagnostics or interconnect tests before you even
boot a machine up. Or upgrade firmware.

Hate to do this, but Googling  egi fs0: turned up Redhat documentation:
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHL-AS-AW-2.1-Manual/rhl-ig-as-itanium-en-2.1/s1-ia64-intro-efi-shell.html
http://tinyurl.com/lyleht



Indeed, widening this discussion further, the BIOS system really
sucks. It was implemented 20 odd years ago at the dawn of the IBM PC,
and lives on to this day.
Maybe rightly, maybe wrongly, Intels strategy for moving from 32 bit
computing to server-grade 64 bit systems was Itanium - coupled with
the EFI firmware and the RAS features you need for large server-grade
systems (imagine systems which monitor themselves, log all memory and
processor errors).
The AMD x86-64 line was not supposed to happen - they stole a march on
Intel. However they retained the BIOS in order to do that.

Expect though a resurgence in EFI when the Nehalem-EX systems hit the
ground early next year - and they habe the same RAS features as
Itanium.
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug