Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:08:24 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: Robert Nordier <rnordier@nordier.com>, Andreas Braukmann <braukmann@tse-online.de>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Trouble booting from WinNT with new boot loader Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.990106150714.2734K-100000@current1.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <199901062140.NAA00594@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
if the first sector passes 0x80 then that is just fine. the bootblocks in da0 will be run and they will pick up the changed spec in the second block.. On Wed, 6 Jan 1999, Mike Smith wrote: > > This is exactly why at whistle we use the 2nd block of the first > > disk to store this stuff. (see 'nextboot(8)') > > the bootblocks on da0 load a default from da0-block1, > > which specify: > > da(1,........ > > > > I am thinking of adding code to actually make the 2nd block require to be > > in it's own slice type (not 165) so that it is marked as being in-use > > rather than using a 'free' block like we do now.. > > > > I've added a 4th slice below that shows what it would look like.... > > what do you think? > > It wouldn't help in this situation; the NT bootloader is passing 0x80 > in as the "current disk" I think, and so the first sector is all at sea. > > -- > \\ 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-current" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.990106150714.2734K-100000>