Difference between revisions of "QEMU"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Hopspitfire (talk | contribs) (New page: '''THIS DOES NOT WORK. REPEAT, DOES NOT WORK. THIS IS STILL BEING INVESTIGATED.''' 1) Grab [*https://garage.maemo.org/scm/?group_id=877 qemu-omap3]. 2) Compile (standard configure options...) |
Hopspitfire (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''THIS DOES NOT WORK. REPEAT, DOES NOT WORK. THIS IS STILL BEING INVESTIGATED.''' | '''THIS DOES NOT WORK. REPEAT, DOES NOT WORK. THIS IS STILL BEING INVESTIGATED.''' | ||
| − | 1) Grab [ | + | 1) Grab [https://garage.maemo.org/scm/?group_id=877 qemu-omap3]. |
2) Compile (standard configure options are fine). | 2) Compile (standard configure options are fine). | ||
3) Create a full PC-partitioned disk image with a fat32 partition. extract the root image into it: | 3) Create a full PC-partitioned disk image with a fat32 partition. extract the root image into it: | ||
Revision as of 17:37, 22 July 2009
THIS DOES NOT WORK. REPEAT, DOES NOT WORK. THIS IS STILL BEING INVESTIGATED.
1) Grab qemu-omap3. 2) Compile (standard configure options are fine). 3) Create a full PC-partitioned disk image with a fat32 partition. extract the root image into it:
mount -o loop,offset=16384 root.img m cd m tar xzvf ../nova-cust-image-castle.rootfs.tar.gz
4) The bootloader must be named mlo in the root directory:
cp boot/boot.bin mlo cd .. umount m
5) qemu-system-arm -M beagle -sd root.img
You will probably get this output:
omap3_mmc_fat_boot: MLO file not found in the root directory qemu: fatal: no boot device found R00=00000000 R01=00000000 R02=00000000 R03=00000000 R04=00000000 R05=00000000 R06=00000000 R07=00000000 R08=00000000 R09=00000000 R10=00000000 R11=00000000 R12=00000000 R13=00000000 R14=00000000 R15=400140a4 PSR=400001d3 -Z-- A svc32 Aborted
Not sure why. Still digging.
I added some debugging hooks into QEMU and it looks like it's not parsing the file system. it's *finding* everything fine, but seems to not want to actually read the data clusters. Perhaps it's an issue with mkdosfs...?