Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 16:33:14 -0400 From: "Isaac Waldron" <waldroni@lr.net> To: "FreeBSD-Stable List" <stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: No /boot/loader (dangerously dedicated) Message-ID: <005a01bff4e5$3a9080a0$0100000a@waldron.house> References: <200007231933.PAA00475@aldan.algebra.com> <00072314472900.27722@dave>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----- Original Message ----- From: David Uhring <duhring@charter.net> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com>; Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu> Cc: Thomas Stromberg <tstromberg@rtci.com>; <stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2000 3:42 PM Subject: Re: No /boot/loader (dangerously dedicated) > On Sun, 23 Jul 2000, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > > Doug White once stated: > > > > => Wait! Smarter then what? So it can boot NT and Win98 for some > > => weenies, or, actually do something useful (not sure what, though)? > > => Why am I to waste space (even so little) "to be compatible with other > > => OSes", if there will never be any other OSes? > > = > > =So you'll be compatible with your BIOS as well. Many BIOSen get really, > > =really torqued if your partition table isn't normal. > > > > I'm yet to see a BIOS, for which this is true. May be, I'm just lucky... > > > > =It's a negligible amount of space. Just say 'Yes'. :) > > > > Althouh, I'm delighted to see my opinion matter so much :), I don't see > > the benefit. Making the loader smarter? To do what? To play some silly > > animations, while loading kernel? No thanks... > > > > -mi > > I have to agree with Mikhail. On a dedicated server, there is no need to > concern ourselves with future OS additions to the HD. And I haven't had any > problems with BIOS's as old as IBM's from 1995, although I suspect that some of > Compaq's BIOS's may give rise to problems. My one Compaq box gives a warning > about running a configuration utility to install Unix, but I can't find it on > their web site. Leave the option as is; it ain't broken, don't fix it. > > dave > I recently graduated from high school, where I worked pretty closely with the Technology Coordinator as to decisions about technology. Unfortunately, he was absolutely stuck on WinNT as the way to do his webserving and what-not. I eventually persueded him to let me try setting up a webserver for the school on a 486 that we had kicking around. I was pretty sure it would be able to handle the load that we get, even though the school was running NT 4 on a Pentium something or other. To make a long story short, when I tried installing FreeBSD on the HDD as a dedicated disk, the box went haywire. I think the BIOS was the problem, because it just wouldn't boot the disk at all after that. Well, after seeing me spend a whole day trying to get it to work, he decided to stick with NT. Now, my point is that having a real partition table entry is probably a good idea, considering the problems that can happen if you don't use one. I think that the option for a dedicated disk shouldn't even be presented in the novice install, one should have to set an option in the appropriate screeen in sysinstall to get a dangerously dedicated disk. Isaac Waldron waldroni (at) lr (dot) net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?005a01bff4e5$3a9080a0$0100000a>