Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 8 Dec 2000 17:59:56 +0100
From:      "'Wilko Bulte'" <wkb@freebie.demon.nl>
To:        "Koster, K.J." <K.J.Koster@kpn.com>
Cc:        Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Borg SRM? (was: Lynx test / 2nd attempt)
Message-ID:  <20001208175956.A6118@freebie.demon.nl>
In-Reply-To: <59063B5B4D98D311BC0D0001FA7E4522026D7A9C@l04.research.kpn.com>; from K.J.Koster@kpn.com on Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 10:34:15AM %2B0100
References:  <59063B5B4D98D311BC0D0001FA7E4522026D7A9C@l04.research.kpn.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 10:34:15AM +0100, Koster, K.J. wrote:
> Dear All,

> I can't resist dripping a little oil on the fire. I'll be accepting flames
> for that in the next ten minutes.

You bet..

> > > Who has an Alpha that can recognize their controller in
> > > AlphaBIOS or ARC, but not in SRM?
> > 
> > Next to everybody: Adaptec 29xx come to mind.
> >
> Ok, how about a wrapper around SRM, delegating all the do-thing-quickly
> tasks to the real and untarnisched SRM, but adding hooks for the more
> mundane task of getting the first few blocks off a controller that SRM
> pretends isn't there.

My vision: don't we have enough problems with getting the alpha port
working on the various alphas? I mean, do we really need extra complexities
that might be triggered by hardware that has not been tested with SRM
and needs weird hacks?

W/
-- 
Wilko Bulte  	 					Arnhem, the Netherlands
wilko@freebsd.org  	http://www.freebsd.org 		http://www.nlfug.nl



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?20001208175956.A6118>