From owner-freebsd-questions  Tue Jul 11 11:18:10 1995
Return-Path: questions-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id LAA29280
          for questions-outgoing; Tue, 11 Jul 1995 11:18:10 -0700
Received: from cs.weber.edu (cs.weber.edu [137.190.16.16])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id LAA29274
          for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 11 Jul 1995 11:18:09 -0700
Received: by cs.weber.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1.1)
	id AA17705; Tue, 11 Jul 95 12:09:52 MDT
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert)
Message-Id: <9507111809.AA17705@cs.weber.edu>
Subject: Re: 2.0.5 64 meg RAM limit?
To: davidg@Root.COM
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 95 12:09:51 MDT
Cc: a00776@giant.mindlink.net, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199507110152.SAA02421@corbin.Root.COM> from "David Greenman" at Jul 10, 95 06:52:24 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL52]
Sender: questions-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

>    In the future FreeBSD will get the information in a different way (using
> special BIOS calls at boot time), but there isn't sufficient space in the boot
> blocks to do this and thus it first requires a 3 stage boot.

Or the ability to make BIOS calls from protected mode, a more general
cross-architecture (less PC-centric) mechanism, if there is any desire
at all to minimize the cross-platform portability dependencies in the
boot code and effectively reduce the amount of assembly code involved
in what is, effectively, run-once code.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.