Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 18:55:26 +0900 From: Toshihiro Kanda <candy@fct.kgc.co.jp> To: Don Yuniskis <dgy@rtd.com> Cc: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: wd? numbering question Message-ID: <199606210955.SAA03695@xxx.fct.kgc.co.jp> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 21 Jun 1996 01:35:25 MST." <199606210835.BAA00819@seagull.rtd.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199606210835.BAA00819@seagull.rtd.com>, Don Yuniskis writes: > > > Thank you for your advice. So, I ask again, why wd1 is not defined > > > as "disk wd1 at wdc? drive ?" ? Doesn't it work? > > > > Don't think this would work -- but that doesn't mean it sounds > > unreasonable. > > I think you'll get bit because the /dev/wd* entries would need a different > minor device encoding scheme (I'm assuming he's asking to have wd0 be the > *first* wd drive and wd1 be the second -- regardless of which controller! > so wd1 could end up on wdc1) Thank you again, my gurus. Yes, I thought it would be happy if my second IDE (secondary-master) is probed as wd1. GENERIC of BSD/OS 2.1 hints me :-) > > Use send-pr(1) to submit your patches. :-) > > Funny guy... ;-) I wish I could X-) Or let boot(8) say "Use 2d(0,a)/kernel to boot wd2 when wd1 is not installed..." candy@fct.kgc.co.jp (Toshihiro Kanda)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606210955.SAA03695>