From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jan  3 10:18:26 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id KAA28205
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 10:18:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA28200
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 10:18:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id LAA15058; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 11:07:39 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199601031807.LAA15058@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: X for install
To: jdl@jdl.com (Jon Loeliger)
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 11:07:39 -0700 (MST)
Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, obrien@cs.ucdavis.edu, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <199601030503.XAA02277@chrome.jdl.com> from "Jon Loeliger" at Jan 2, 96 11:02:46 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

> This sounds to me like the same general goal as the separation of
> the hardware detection process during boot -- part of the detect,
> semi-probe, negotiate, allocate, attach process that we've often
> discussed.  Can the same core be used for both the normal UNIX boot
> process and for the initial system config/install process?  Or am
> I totally in the weeds here?

*Can* it?

"Windows 95 will now determine the hardware installed in you system.
 If this takes too long, turn off your computer (do *not* try to use
 control-alt-delete) and restart setup.  It will resume after the
 device that caused the crash"

I maintain that if Microsoft can do it, *anyone* can do it.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.