From owner-freebsd-current Thu Feb 27 13: 4:39 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DEDA37B407 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:04:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail15.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.215]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 178F143FE0 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:04:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 6419 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2003 21:04:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender ) by mail15.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 27 Feb 2003 21:04:36 -0000 Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h1RL2shT027598; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 16:02:54 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.2 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 16:04:43 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin To: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: Any ideas why we can't even boot a i386 ? Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, Geoffrey , Ruslan Ermilov Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 27-Feb-2003 Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 1:27 PM +0200 2/27/03, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: >>: RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/i386/conf/GENERIC,v >>: Working file: GENERIC >>: description: >>: ---------------------------- >>: revision 1.296 >>: date: 2001/01/14 10:11:10; author: jhb; state: Exp; lines: +2 -2 >>: >>: Remove I386_CPU from GENERIC. Support for the 386 seriously >>: pessimizes performance on other x86 processors. Custom kernels >>: can still be built that will run on the 386. > > While there was good reason for removing i386 from GENERIC, that > does mean that someone "just wanting to try freebsd" on a i386 > may very well give up before realizing that it does (hopefully!) > work. > > For official release CDs, should we also provide a GENERIC_I386 > kernel, so the person can get up-and-running without having to > first build a new kernel? Or will they just run into other > problems once they get past the kernel, due to everything else > in the system being compiled for i486 & newer? > > I think we (developers) get a little too used to having multiple > machines around, and assume that everyone who might want to test > freebsd will have some hardware that works for the GENERIC kernel, > and which they can use to first do a buildkernel for the hardware > they really want to test freebsd on. > > I'm thinking maybe the 5.x release CD's should include: > GENERIC > GENERIC +SMP I plan to make SMP kernels work on a UP machine like they do on all of our other platforms thus obsoleting the need for this. > GENERIC +VMWARE-friendly settings This might be useful. > GENERIC for i386 I doubt the usefulness of this. i386 kernels were just accidentally broken for almost a month and a half without anyone noticing. People wouldn't have noticed if phk@ hadn't asked for a volunteer either. I386_CPU kernel compiles have been broken in the past for rather long periods of time before being noticed as well. > Would that add too much extra work for a 5.x release? You have access to the source, go for it. :) With cdboot, all you need to do is create a /boot/vmware/ directory with kernel (and maybe modules) in the ISO image and the user can break into the loader and type 'boot vmware' to boot it. src/release/* awaits your tested patches. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message