From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Oct 20 15:58:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA26418 for chat-outgoing; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 15:58:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat) Received: from sax.sax.de (sax.sax.de [193.175.26.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA26324 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 15:55:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from j@uriah.heep.sax.de) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by sax.sax.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id AAA10510; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 00:54:27 +0200 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.8.7/8.8.5) id AAA15188; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 00:51:08 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <19971021005107.XS58141@uriah.heep.sax.de> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 00:51:07 +0200 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: support@mailbox.intel.com (Steve), filo@yahoo.com Subject: Re: BIOS Bootstrap incompatability; AL440LX at A4LL0X0.86A.0013.P03 References: <199710200143.SAA25579@mailbox.intel.com> <199710200157.LAA00509@word.smith.net.au> X-Mailer: Mutt 0.60_p2-3,5,8-9 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) In-Reply-To: <199710200157.LAA00509@word.smith.net.au>; from Mike Smith on Oct 20, 1997 11:27:06 +0930 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk As Mike Smith wrote: > As this represents an official communication from Intel, rather than a > private communication, I am copying my reply (containing the entire > text of your response) to a number of interested parties, who may find > your attitude enlightening. Indeed, i found it enlightening. :-/ > > >Section D.1 of the BBS 1.01 advises that the bootstrap should consult > > >the value in the DL register in order to determine the BIOS unit > > >number of the boot device. > > Further details will not be necessary as FreeBDS is not one of the > > tested operating system and is not supported. An interesting attitude, really. > > It is in a similar catagory as Linix, there is a cost of media form of > > this OS. Past experience with any of these operating systems is that > > they do not support Plug and Play and have limited ability to support > > all of the features of PCI cards. The user must choose OS supported > > devices carefully, and must extend considerable effort in configuring > > systems. > > I am not entirely sure what your point is here. Well, i am rather sure what he was going to tell us: ``The user must choose OS supported devices carefully,...''. Together with Intel violating the (self-produced) specs, this can only translate into ``Avoid buying Intel products.'' This statement, heard from an Intel official, is indeed, well, interesting. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)