From owner-freebsd-alpha Sat Dec 4 17:29:37 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Received: from feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E584F15366; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 17:29:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from semuta.feral.com (semuta [192.67.166.70]) by feral.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11633; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 17:29:35 -0800 Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 17:29:35 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: Mike Smith Cc: Andrew Reilly , alpha@FreeBSD.ORG, port-alpha@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Q: Compaq, *BSD and 'Linux-only' AlphaBIOS (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199912050126.RAA05619@mass.cdrom.com> 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 > > The SRM vs. AlphaBios/ARC issues are a phantom. *BSD has a long way to go > > to fully support the SRM capapble machines before worrying about platforms > > which don't have SRM. This is a sideshow. I would have said it was more > > critical if Tru64 died, but much to &my& surprise it was NT-Alpha that > > walked the plank, not DUh (now Tru64). Given that Tru64 is very > > successfully selling on the leading new Dompaq platforms (and depends on > > SRM), I rather doubt *BSD will get all that left behind because we've not > > gotten ARC/AlphaBios yet. > > If you know something I don't about Alpha Processor Inc's machines, I'd > love to hear it. They are only shipping AlphaBIOS, since there is MILO > code for their systems. Nope, but I can't speak for their choices or business model. Do they have a machine that is an absolute *must have* for *BSD? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message