From owner-freebsd-mobile Wed Nov 29 14:27: 7 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.123.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E91F37B400 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 14:27:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from nomad.yogotech.com (nomad.yogotech.com [206.127.123.131]) by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA27390; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:26:47 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate@nomad.yogotech.com) Received: (from nate@localhost) by nomad.yogotech.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18903; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:26:46 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate) From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14885.33446.81161.292998@nomad.yogotech.com> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:26:46 -0700 (MST) To: Greg Lehey Cc: Nate Williams , FreeBSD mobile Mailing List Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Thinkpads In-Reply-To: <20001130084740.K48277@echunga.lemis.com> References: <3A23D5BD.5CF72F4F@dccnet.com> <200011281624.eASGOdF25354@mass.osd.bsdi.com> <14885.15275.584459.919834@nomad.yogotech.com> <20001130084740.K48277@echunga.lemis.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 12) "Channel Islands" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams) Sender: owner-freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > >>>> FreeBSD - Unable to boot OS after installation on > >>>> IBM Thinkpad A20, A21, T20, T21, or X20. > >>> > >>> Question: Does IBM reserve space on the HDD of their laptops for system BIOS > >>> that would cause such a problem in the event of a dedicated installation? > >> > >> No. Some fool at IBM (or whomever they contracted the BIOS development > >> out to) decided to use partition ID 165 for the suspend-to-disk > >> partition, and the IBM BIOS gets very, very upset when it finds what it > >> thinks is an enormous suspend-to-disk partition on the disk. > > > > I'm pretty sure that's not the case. In fact, I'm almost positive > > that's not the case, as we have a number of FreeBSD machines running on > > these boxes. > > > > However, what *is* happening is that the boot-blocks are too big (this > > was the case in 4.1, and was fixed in 4.2, something about using up > > 2-sectors or somesuch) which causes the IBM BIOS to barf on it for some > > reason. > > > > If you install older/newer bootlblocks, it works fine. Unfortunately, > > these boxes became popular around the time that FreeBSD 4.1 was > > released, so anyone that attempted to install with it made their > > computers unable to recognize the disks. > > > > It's really a 'BIOS' problem, since if you use older (smaller) > > bootblocks and the partition of 165, it works fine. > > Have you tried it? Yep. However, we did have a WinXX partition on the front of the disk, and it may have been due to other factors, since as re-writing the MBR, as well as the partition table. In recovering the laptop, we did a number of things, and I assumed (it seems wrongly) that it was related to the boot0 size. The user wasn't interested in testing, and just wanted a working laptop. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message