[syslinux] Confusion on lpxelinux vs. gpxelinux vs. ipxe vs gpxe.

Geert Stappers stappers at stappers.nl
Sun Oct 25 00:23:03 PDT 2015

On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 08:04:08PM -0400, Gene Cumm wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 6:15 PM, Michael Brown wrote:
> > Also, not a fork: http://git.ipxe.org/ipxe.git/commitdiff/8406115
> A fork is a fork, regardless the reasons behind it (yes, I have some
> understanding in this case).

So take some time to elaborate that understanding and translate it to
this project.

Yes, I'm some what angry that the gPXE rename to iPXE is called a fork.
Where fork is considered a four letter word. I think forking is way
of how software evolves. Avoiding a fork is good, but not at all costs.

> iPXE is based off of forking further development as of a certain gPXE
> commit with some backporting of gPXE development to iPXE.

And all the heavy lifting done by mcb30, Michael Brown.
Yes, the mcb30 from the Etherboot project.

Geert Stappers
Leven en laten leven
------------- volgend deel ------------
Een niet-tekst bijlage is gescrubt...
Naam: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Grootte: 836 bytes
Omschrijving: Digital signature
URL : <http://www.zytor.com/pipermail/syslinux/attachments/20151025/34fdd737/attachment.sig>

More information about the Syslinux mailing list