On 12/03/2016 09:55, Gordan Bobic wrote: > On 12/03/16 07:46, Michael Howard wrote: >> On 11/03/2016 20:02, Gordan Bobic wrote: >>> On 11/03/16 17:56, Jeremiah Rothschild wrote: >>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 05:03:46PM +0000, Michael Howard wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 11/03/2016 16:45, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 10:31:20AM +0000, Michael Howard wrote: >>>>>>> 5 seconds only to be precise, at least on my board :) >>>>>> I found TFTP to be slower and more unreliable than that. However my >>>>>> TFTP server is dnsmasq running on an old box, >>>>> >>>>> That could be the reason then. Sdcards are painfully slow so you get >>>>> what you pay for metaphorically speaking. No big deal either way I >>>>> guess but I much prefer tftp here on a completely 1Gb network and a >>>>> tftp server on a 24/7 Xenserver VM. >>>> >>>> Both methods are a little unorthodox - at least in my experience. >>> >>> In the ARM world, booting the kernel straight out of u-boot is the >>> norm. It is how the boot process works on the vast majority of ARM >>> devices. It is loading UEFI at all that is unorthodox. UEFI and BIOS >>> before it are very much x86-isms. >>> >>>> Is there >>>> a spinning disk based solution perhaps, too? I would imagine the chain >>>> could be loaded from any storage resource. Can it be hacked onto an >>>> extra >>>> OS drive partition or something? >>> >>> UEFI requires a FAT partition anyway that you could also use for this. >>> The main question is whether u-boot that ships with this board >>> actually supports SATA. If it does it would be trivially easy to make >>> that work. Ask me again in 48 hours and I'll be able to tell you >>> whether that works on this particular Gigabyte board. :) >>> >> The shipped u-boot does not support sata. > > Are you sure about that? Look at the "scsi" command in u-boot. I > haven't tried whether it actually works yet, but I hope to by the end > of the day. > Of course, you're probably right. -- Mike Howard