Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago
That is not considered as a problem.
The loading mechanism is the same for both ntldr and bootmgr. And it is not
necessary to distinguish one from the other.
Since the "loadability of bootmgr" is undocumented, it is not necessary to make
it clear.
Changing the message string "NTLDR" to "NTLDR/BOOTMGR" does not make sense.
People might change NTLDR or BOOTMGR to another name and chainload it with the
new name. The message will not track the real filename actually used.
Original comment by tinyb...@gmail.com
on 29 Dec 2012 at 3:59
Only the boot-loader of Windows is to be loaded, not Windows' kernel. So the
message should not say "Windows". A reliable way has not found yet to load
Windows' kernel.
Original comment by tinyb...@gmail.com
on 29 Dec 2012 at 4:15
>>>Changing the message string "NTLDR" to "NTLDR/BOOTMGR" does not make sense.
People might change NTLDR or BOOTMGR to another name and chainload it with the
new name. The message will not track the real filename actually used.
If they change the name the message 'Will boot NTLDR' does not make sense
either!
What about 'Will boot Windows Loader file from ...' ?
Original comment by Steve6375
on 29 Dec 2012 at 4:57
>>> What about 'Will boot Windows Loader file from ...' ?
I think it has the same meaning as "Will boot NTLDR from ..." where NTLDR
stands for Windows loader file.
Original comment by tinyb...@gmail.com
on 30 Dec 2012 at 3:48
And it is historic. At the early development, there is no bootmgr, only ntldr.
Later bootmgr appeared. Thankfully, bootmgr can be loaded just in the same way
as NTLDR, nothing need to change. So the code (and the message) never changed.
Original comment by tinyb...@gmail.com
on 30 Dec 2012 at 3:56
The word NTLDR here is just a "notion". It mainly refers to the file FORMAT
recognized by grub4dos. Not only MS can use this format, but anyone else.
Original comment by tinyb...@gmail.com
on 30 Dec 2012 at 4:06
Original comment by tinyb...@gmail.com
on 5 Jan 2013 at 12:14
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
Steve6375
on 29 Dec 2012 at 10:28