Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 18:29:07 -0400 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= ) Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/eeprom Makefile eeprom.8 eeprom.c ofw_options.c ofw_options.h Message-ID: <p0602040abcd6d2458c8c@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <xzpu0y6ermu.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <200405221656.i4MGu50k062998@repoman.freebsd.org> <xzp3c5rf0gu.fsf@dwp.des.no> <p06020409bcd6c46a4d65@[128.113.24.47]> <xzpu0y6ermu.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 11:54 PM +0200 5/23/04, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: >Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> writes: >> "Handle", in what sense? How does /boot/loader.conf have any >> connection to anything PROM-ish? > >They are both used to set boot parameters such as which device to >use for /, and to a certain extent to configure the hardware. If I can set some value using 'vi', then it seems a little odd to run a program called `eeprom' to set the same value. Or to use `eeprom' to add or change some values in /boot/loader.conf, but need to use `vi' to set other values in the same file. I don't have much of an objection to the idea, but IMO it seems like a slippery and unattractive slope to head down. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn =3D gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p0602040abcd6d2458c8c>