Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 31 Aug 1998 16:06:47 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Simon Shapiro <shimon@simon-shapiro.org>
To:        (Chris G. Demetriou) <cgd@netbsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Alpha Install - oops!
Message-ID:  <XFMail.980831160647.shimon@simon-shapiro.org>
In-Reply-To: <87af4ljeot.fsf@netbsd1.cygnus.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

Chris G. Demetriou, On 31-Aug-98 you wrote:
>  Simon Shapiro <shimon@simon-shapiro.org> writes:
> > * First had to fibure out how to tell the NetBSD loader to load the
> > kernel.
> >   Hint to the less initiated than I am (Last DEC cnsole I worked on was
> >   on
> >   a VAX/750):
> >      +  shutdown now
> >      +  umount -a
> >      +  halt
> >      +  AT the ``Boot >>> '' prompt, type:
> >             boot freebsd.GENERIC-980830 (or whatever)
> >   Any deviation will cause the previous kernel to boot. No prompts will
> >   be
> >   given,  The Netbsd documentation is sparse or incorrect in this area.
>  
>  All of the statements below are assuming that the '>>>' prompt you see
>  is the SRM console prompt.  Since I wrote most of the NetBSD boot
>  block code, and a quick grep of the current sources don't indicate
>  that any prompt like that would bit spit out by them, that seems
>  correct.

Yup. That looks like SRM prompt.

>  The ">>>" prompt is the SRM console prompt.  It's well documented, in
>  the manuals that should have come with your system (if your system
>  came with SRM), or which are available on the web (if i recall
>  correctly).  Additionally, SRM supports not-extensive but usable
>  online help.  NetBSD shouldn't be documenting how the firmware,
>  provided by somebody else entirely, works.

Sorry for having offended you.  My statements were inaccurate. 
Clarification:

*  There was NO documentation with the systems.  None.  Entirely not your
   fault.

*  NetBSD charter indeed should/does not cover documenting the SRM.

*  However, it is a ``nice to have'' a brief message in the alpha/INSTALL
   that says something like:

     The boot monitor (program/BIOS) that Alphas use, is called SRM (on
     machines compatible with Digital Unix, NetBSD, etc.  Thisprogram
     unders certain conditions will prompt you with ``Boot>>> ''.  these
     conditions are:

     a.  The machine just booted from power-up.  you have about N seconds
         to type something, or the default action (whatever that may be)
         will take place.

     b. You shut the machine down with the /sbin/halt command.  If you use
        ``/sbin/reboot'', or ``/sbin/shutdown -r ...''  You will not be
        given a chance to type in your boot command.

    No, it is not your duty to document DEC's work, but it sure would have
    helped your fellow man to have these comments instead of ``...Once the
    floppy has been made, you simply need to put it in the drive and type
    boot  dva0''. 

*  I combed the NetBSD documentation, in search for a way to boot alternate
   kernels, and all I could find, in the ``Building Custom Kernel'' section
   is a reference to typing spaces to the first (second) stage prompt.  This
   obviously did not work.

>  Do you have any examples of places where the NetBSD documentation
>  _does_ mention SRM and/or the things you tell SRM to boot, which are
>  incorrect?

I think it is hard to prove omission.  Nothing in the documentation is
explicitly and clearly misleading.  From my moderate experience in this
field, I collect that there is an assumption of prior knowledge in the
explanations and guides I did find.  While my computer knowledge may be
average, I am coming from a diffferent prior knowledge that I presume is
assumed in what I read so far.

Finally,  I really do not want this thread to become a flaming war so
typical to Net vs. Free.  I think you all have done and continue to do a
wonderful job that deserves much gratitude and many thanks.  Having bad
feelings (or causing them) is not on my mind.

Tell me something else;  Does NetBSD have the equivalent of FreeBSD soft
interrupts?  If so, I may ease my life and simply port my drivers to
NetBSD, instead of trying to have NetBSD boot FreeBSD.  

Having DPT, i2o, and FiberChannel in NetBSD may not be a bad thing.

Simon


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.980831160647.shimon>