Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 00:23:35 -0800 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: shimon@simon-shapiro.org Cc: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, alpha@FreeBSD.ORG, "Justin M.Seger" <jseger@freebsd.scds.com> Subject: Re: boot.conf Message-ID: <199811040823.AAA01087@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 03 Nov 1998 20:25:16 EST." <XFMail.981103202516.shimon@simon-shapiro.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Mike Smith, On 03-Nov-98 you wrote: > > > Is there a document of any sorts documenting the format of boot.conf? > > > > It's just a series of commands for the interpreter; the current syntax > > is described reasonably succinctly in sys/boot/common/help.common, > > although with the Ficl issue it's likely that there will be some > > changes coming. > > Ficl issue? Missed that one. In case nobody said that publicly, and since > you seem the spokesman for the new boot; Job Well Done! Thanx! Thanks. Real credit for making it practical has to go to Robert Nordier; without BTX it would never have flown. Ficl is the Forth interpreter we're looking at integrating into the bootstrap, with the goal of using it to keep bloat down and making the bootstrap customisable. It's still a fairly experimental concept. > BTW, I made good on my threat to really get involved in this project; I > just installed a compile machine and am rebuilding it now. > > It is something called AlphaPC LX164 or some such. Looks like a PCI > motherboard. Not at all like the PWau. Yup, sounds like an EB164 or similar. > Also, NFS seems reasonable between the two machines. And stability is > excellent. Hmm. If you want one area where you could make a really significant contribution, it would be to write a fast, reliable, memory-sensible ACCESS RPC cache module for our NFS client. We've been ragged by NetApp for doing far too much ACCESS activity against their filers (60-80% of all network traffic), which would be *really* hurting our performance. I've been rolling a design around for a few days that I wouldn't mind discussing with someone interested in implementing it. It should be fast and more importantly, memory-efficient. > BTW, performance is not so bad either. Yeah, you should try doing some floating point work on these machines. They really smoke! -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199811040823.AAA01087>