Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 01:34:21 -0700
From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org>
To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Tidying src/release/*/{dokern.sh,drivers.conf}
Message-ID: <20030520083421.GB22249@dragon.nuxi.com>
In-Reply-To: <20030520044418.GA34212@sunbay.com>
References: <3EC825C4.6040203@btc.adaptec.com> <20030519024518.05B402A7EA@canning.wemm.org> <20030519061401.GB40604@sunbay.com> <20030519192119.GA4267@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030519193120.GB79469@sunbay.com> <20030519221106.GA17226@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030520044418.GA34212@sunbay.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 07:44:18AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 03:11:06PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
> > On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 10:31:20PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > > > sparc64/GENERIC was the old-man out. I feel we should return
> > > > {i386,alpha,ia64}/GENERIC back to their previous way of no ispfw since
> > > > this is quite late in the 5.1 game to be changing this. I then think we
> > > > should ponder making sparc64 consistent with {i386,alpha,ia64}/GENERIC.
> > >
> > > I do not object. Removing it now from sparc64/GENERIC would
> > > be premature since sparc64 does not have drivers.conf, and
> > > this would give us the BOOTMFS without it, and without being
> > > able to load it as a module.
> >
> > You do know that we do not support boot floppies on sparc64, correct?
> >
> I wonder why we then have this:
>
> ftp> pwd
> 257 "/pub/FreeBSD/releases/sparc64/5.1-BETA/floppies" is current directory.
> ftp> dir
> 229 Entering Extended Passive Mode (|||1119|)
> 150 Opening ASCII mode data connection for directory listing.
> total 8256
> -rw-r--r-- 1 110 root 4194304 May 8 02:18 boot.flp
Note that that is a 4MB image -- I don't know of any floppy that will fit
on.
Note that sparc64/dokern.sh only changes the kernel ident and removes
nothing. The sparc64 boot.flp is used as the boot image for the CDROM.
The fact that it has a .flp is a pure side affect of release/Makefile's
legacy assumption that every platform has boot floppies. Yet another way
that release/Makefile needs a *major* over haul. I'd take that on, but I
know the resulting argument that would entail.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030520083421.GB22249>