From owner-freebsd-alpha Fri Dec 3 14:53:35 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Received: from guild.net (guild.net [209.166.166.144]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F9D214A16 for ; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 14:53:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from isildur@guild.net) Received: from localhost (isildur@localhost) by guild.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA03240; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 17:52:32 -0500 Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 17:52:32 -0500 (EST) From: Lord Isildur To: Matthew Jacob Cc: alpha@freebsd.org, port-alpha@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Q: Compaq, *BSD and 'Linux-only' AlphaBIOS (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I consider SRM to be the way to go, and i think instead the convoluted hacks that things like MILO had to go through are the rsult of using the ARC/ALphaBIOS _instead_ of using SRM. Now that Compaq has released SRMs for so many more models and eliminated the need to buy the developer kit, i see no reason to consider ARC anymore _at all_. It was a cheap second best rigged up so that NT could work on Alphas, and I dont see why we need to try to cater on NT's inadequacies and start using ARC/AlphaBIOS or the workarounds to it like MILO. SRM is the 'high class' firmware, whatever, it is available and is superior to ARC/AB. BSD has used SRM since the beginning- why should we dilute that now, especially when some of the last arguments for it have lost their bite? just my $.02, isildur On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 11:47:27 -0800 > From: Richard Henderson > Reply-To: axp-list@redhat.com > To: "warp@xs4all.nl" > Cc: axp-list@redhat.com > Subject: Re: Q: Compaq, *BSD and 'Linux-only' AlphaBIOS > Resent-Date: 3 Dec 1999 21:15:44 -0000 > Resent-From: axp-list@redhat.com > Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; > > On Thu, Dec 02, 1999 at 02:02:29PM +0100, warp@xs4all.nl wrote: > > 1) Is anybody planning to make MILO work with NetBSD*; > > >From what I could tell from browsing the OpenBSD source, the only > thing standing in the way of the BSDs booting off MILO is their > reliance on SRM callbacks for printing to the console during the > early boot process. And some bits that read the SRM environment > variables to snag the kernel command line and such. > > It shouldn't be terribly hard to either implement the SRM callbacks > in MILO or (conditionally) avoid them in the BSD kernel. The former > would of course be more helpful. certainly, if anyone _needs_ to use BSD with MILO for some strange reason, it'd be better to modify MILO than BSD. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message