From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue May 6 21:21:53 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA29835 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 6 May 1997 21:21:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA29827 for ; Tue, 6 May 1997 21:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id VAA06890; Tue, 6 May 1997 21:21:00 -0700 (PDT) To: Chris Csanady cc: Brandon Gillespie , FreeBSD-Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Alpha questions.. In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 06 May 1997 20:51:23 CDT." <199705070151.UAA06731@nyx.pr.mcs.net> Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 21:21:00 -0700 Message-ID: <6888.862978860@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Just out of curiosity, couldn't we use a large part of the NetBSD/alpha > machine dependant code? I would think that this would significantly > speed up a port.. Some of it, but there are other problems. For one thing, the NetBSD code requires the SRM console to be installed and everyone now agrees, for a variety of reasons, that the ARC console is the one to target. This will affect the boot code rather significantly. Jordan P.S. And if you don't understand the difference between the SRM and ARC consoles, please don't ask - I don't want to explain it and you don't want to know. :-)