From: branimir.maksimovic@icloud.com   
      
   On 2021-10-21, muta...@gmail.com  wrote:   
   > On Thursday, October 21, 2021 at 12:20:07 PM UTC+11, Branimir Maksimovic   
   wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 2021-10-20, muta...@gmail.com  wrote:   
   >> > It seems to me that the BIOS concept of reading the   
   >> > first sector of the disk into memory and immediately   
   >> > executing it, from offset 0, is a lot cleaner than the   
   >> > UEFI concept of requiring a FAT-formatted disk with   
   >> > subdirectories.   
   >> >   
   >> > If you're going to go for the latter option of a FAT-formatted   
   >> > disk, shouldn't it be something internal to the computer, on   
   >> > a flash drive, that results in loading the first sector from the hard   
   >> > disk and executing it, but perhaps in PM32 or LM64 instead   
   >> > of RM16?   
   >> >   
   >> > Passing the UEFI data structure to the code on the first   
   >> > sector would seem to be more appropriate than doing   
   >> > interrupts though.   
   >> >   
   >> > BFN. Paul.   
   >   
   >> UEFI sucks as it forces FAT32 partition and Windows executable...   
   >   
   > Isn't that what I just said?   
   >   
   > But is there anything wrong with the UEFI data structure   
   > being passed to code executing from sector 0, same as   
   > traditional BIOS?   
   >   
   > BFN. Paul.   
   They wanted to eliminate need for bootloader...   
   nothing wrong,,,   
      
   --   
      
   7-77-777   
   Evil Sinner!   
   with software, you repeat same experiment, expecting different results...   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)