From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 20 08:32:02 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9580237B401; Tue, 20 May 2003 08:32:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from heron.mail.pas.earthlink.net (heron.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.189]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBCD043FB1; Tue, 20 May 2003 08:32:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from user-38ldvdp.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.253.185] helo=mindspring.com) by heron.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (SSLv3:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19I95s-0007kh-00; Tue, 20 May 2003 08:32:01 -0700 Message-ID: <3ECA4A28.8251B133@mindspring.com> Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 08:30:48 -0700 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ruslan Ermilov References: <3EC825C4.6040203@btc.adaptec.com> <20030519024518.05B402A7EA@canning.wemm.org> <20030519192119.GA4267@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030519221106.GA17226@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030520083421.GB22249@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030520084749.GA22687@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030520093423.GA62969@sunbay.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: b1a02af9316fbb217a47c185c03b154d40683398e744b8a42aa26d8af39d663a71ed9cfbfdc63b9b666fa475841a1c7a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Do we want to split release.9 into MD parts now or not? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 15:32:02 -0000 Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > [Reattaching current@ as this turns out to be a normal discussion.] > > >>> .if ${TARGET_ARCH} == "i386" && ${AUTO_KEYBOARD_DETECT} > > I have no idea why we need to boot(8) i386 with -P. I'm pretty sure that it's because some legacy hardware puts the keyboard controller into the keyboard, rather than on the motherboard. E.g. HP Vectra and AT&T 386/SX-16 WGS boxes. > Overall, I think that having 9 architecture ifdefs for > the whole boot floppies creation process is allowable, > especially bearing in mind that they are real tiny, > and 3 of them can be considered temporary. > > On the contrary, in my opinion splitting release.9 into > MD subtargets would bring a lot more disorder here. > > I'd have liked to hear other opinions now (our opinions, > David, we already know ;-). FWIW, I agree with Ruslan. I think the reason this is actually wanted, by those who claim to want it, is that there have been recent questions on whether or not floppies are supported for e.g. SPARC booting, because there are floppy images out there. Maybe adding another knob is a better idea (suppresss floppy creation). -- Terry