Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 08:23:52 -0600 (CST) From: "Paul T. Root" <proot@horton.iaces.com> To: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu Cc: questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Adding IDE to SCSI Message-ID: <199701031423.IAA00202@horton.iaces.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.94.970102133104.451C-100000@localhost> from Doug White at "Jan 2, 97 01:33:27 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In a previous message, Doug White said: > > > > > However the first time I did this, I got the > > > > "operating system missing" message when trying to boot FreeBSD or the > > > > old Win slice. > > > > > > Did you run Fdisk and make sure that the active partition is set to the > > > Win95 one on the IDE disk? FreeBSD will reset the active partition bit > > > and if it's on the second disk it won't boot. > > > > So the second disk (SCSI sd0) should not have anything set as active? > > Yeah, I think so. That will cause the system to try to boot your IDE disk > which will have booteasy on it. Ok, so how do I set the disk so that there is no active partition? I played around with fdisk (and read the man page), but it insists on there being one. > > That may be another problem. > > > > > > I have 2 possiblities for this: > > > > 1) I installed booteasy on the IDE drive via a DOS shell under > > > > Win95. (and left OS/BS on the SCSI disk) > > > > > > That failed. Last night I tried both OS-BS and Booteasy. OS-BS never saw the SCSI drive, booteasy saw it and gave me the F5 option, but hitting F5 just gave me the menu again. > > Ok. > > > > > > 2) When installing booteasy, I had ROM shadowing on for the IDE > > > > controller. It's manual said not to. > > > > > > I have it on and it doesn't cause any problems. > > > > I have this pseudo intelligent IDE controller from GSI. It says to not > > have Shadowing on when you're configuring drives, which I would guess > > putting booteasy or OS/BS on would qualify. > > Perhaps. You might try disabling it's onboard BIOS. What model of card > is it? It's a GSI Model 18. There is no way to disable it's BIOS. > > > > I installed 2.2 Beta as from what I read, 2.1.[56] wouldn't be able to > > > > handle sd0 as sd0 when it's not the first BIOS disk. > > > > > > Well, sort of. It won't be able to figure out how to boot it without a > > > clue from the Boot: prompt.. > > > > So I'll still have to type sd(1,a)/kernel at the boot prompt? > > Ick. Maybe a 120 meg partition for / and swap on the IDE is a better route? > > I hope you don't get stuck in that rut. You can split it if you like, > but that's a pain to install. :( Yeah, I don't really want to do that. I'm starting to think that I'll just pull the 1 Gig SCSI and put both on the 2.5 Gig IDE. I'm doing fine with 800 Meg for FreeBSD, so if I gave it 1.2Gig and Win95 1.2Gig, I should be gold. Win95 is currently packed into 300 Meg (I have a 100 Meg too). Then I can put the 1 Gig on the shelf for when I can really upgrade to a pentium and a new SCSI disk. Actually, I'd rather get another SCSI drive but the price of IDE is so cheap. > > > > Also, somehow the SCSI disks slice information got written onto the > > > > IDE drive. I think this might have something to do with the shadowing. > > > > > > That shouldn't have happened. Are you sure you installed to the right > > > disk? > > > > Yeah, I pulled the SCSI's and it was still like that. Like I said, pseudo > > intelligent controller. > > I would say not-very-intelligent controller. You can say that again. I think I figured out how it got that label. I tried it as a primary IDE controller (obviously, it's the only one), and the manual says that that isn't especially good. Paul. -- "Due to a chronic shortage of robots and computers, your order has been processed by a human being. We regret any inconvenience this may have caused you"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701031423.IAA00202>