Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:36:54 -0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> To: David Wolfskill <dhw@whistle.com> Cc: nate@yogotech.com, mobile@FreeBSD.ORG, rnordier@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads Message-ID: <200011291836.eATIauD82288@mobile.wemm.org> In-Reply-To: <200011291814.eATIEQ833818@pau-amma.whistle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David Wolfskill wrote:
> >From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>
> >Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:48:34 -0700 (MST)
>
> >> >Didn't Robert shrink it back to 1 sector after 4.1 was released? It
> >> >would be interesting to know if the 'smaller' bootblock worked as well.
>
> >> No; jhb found that there was a bug in the boot0 code & fixed it. My
> >> archived mail shows that most of the work occurred on 04 August.
>
> >Hmm, the log message I'm reading says:
>
> > date: 2000/10/02 17:30:22; author: rnordier; state: Exp; lines: +77 -15
1
> > Go back to occupying just a single sector, reverting r1.17 - r1.20.
> >[SNIP
>
> Right; I expressed myself poorly: what I meant by the above is that the
> thing that fixed the boot-hang (back in August) was not a change in the
> size of boot0, but jhb locating & fixing a bug. (I meant no slight to
> either jhb or rnordier; I hope that's clear.)
This has nothing to do with the problem at hand. We had a thinkpad
something-20 belonging to a friend of a friend. The bios would lock up with
*any* FreeBSD installed all the way back to 2.2.5. ie: 2.2.x, 3.x, 4,x and
5.x *ALL* didn't work.
ie: bootblocks are not relevant.
>
> >This is the last commit made to the boot0 code for i386. Ahh, but this
> >code didn't make it back into FreeBSD 4.X, so 4.2 *might* still be
> >succeptible if this is a 2-sector boot0 bug.
>
> True, though other evidence (in this thread) indicates that at least
> part of the problem occurs even if a single sector is all that is used.
The bios locks up regardless of which bootblock are used.. 1k, 0.5k, old 3.x,
or a.out 2.x bootblocks. It simply does not like the partitioning.
Somebody else has suggested that the secret to making FreeBSD work on this
laptop is to have windows set up on the first slice and part of the disk, and
set up and *use* suspend-to-FAT32 *before* installing freebsd.
However, if you do this, you windows partition must be less than 8GB as the
0.5k bootblocks are not able to boot from above-8G. ie: only 4.x is
compatable. If rnordier backs this feature out of 4.x too, then 4.x will
be broken as well because he has not replaced the functionality that he
destroyed (ie: automatic above-8G support).
Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au
"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200011291836.eATIauD82288>