Re: boot server executables vs. execable executables

Hi,

Christopher Fraser wrote:
>
> Sure ... you need basic device drivers and file systems etc to get
> the system up an running. As far as I can tell the main disadvantages
> with loading images as boot tasks are they are not demand paged
> (i.e. always resident in core), can't share images and can't have BBS
> segments (not really sure why). Other than that they're standard images
> as far as VSTa is concerned.

Err, running size on my statically linked boot servers I have BSS segments.
Essentially there's almost no difference between the servers but boot
servers must be statically linked. I'm sure it would be reasonably easy to
make it possible to share images (it just doesn't happen yet) - this would
be very desirable for things like the dos and wd servers. The servers
aren't swappable just to ensure that we don't lose the core facilities on
which the kernel swapper code relies.

> As an aside, how does the waiting for boot servers to initialise
> themselves currently work? I remember someone mentioning this on the
> list a little while ago but can't remember the outcome ... Does it
> mean boot servers have to coded differently to ordinary servers?
> I can't find an instances of this in the server code I've looked
> at so far ...

No, they are essentially the same as any other server, it's just that things
like the dos server are coded to attempt connection retries (up to say 10
seconds) to other servers on which they rely.

                        Regards,
                        Dave
Received on Tue Dec 20 00:36:06 1994