From owner-freebsd-qa Mon Dec 17 15:46:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from mail12.speakeasy.net (mail12.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.212]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFBA637B41B for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:46:30 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 18590 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 23:46:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO laptop.baldwin.cx) ([64.81.54.73]) (envelope-sender ) by mail12.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 17 Dec 2001 23:46:29 -0000 Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:46:14 -0800 (PST) From: John Baldwin To: qa@FreeBSD.org Subject: Should we test cdboot on 4.5 RC's? Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hmm, does anyone else think it might be worthwhile to MFC the new cdboot replacement for the broken cdldr code in 4.x. Then for the RC's we chould ship two versions of each ISO, one with cdboot as the bootable image and the other with boot.flp so we can have people test it and see how if cdboot works on most computers or not? The only difference in the ISO's is what image is set as bootable on the mkisofs command line, other than that the images would both have the same exact file contents. This might be a good way to test out how widespread support of no emulation booting is so we can think about switching to it by default on the ISO's. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message