Nils Ackermann wrote: > > Andrew Sharp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The sun4m boxes are 32 bit processor boxes while you are running > > your ultra1 in 64 bit land. But you say that you built the kernel > > on the client, so it should be good for that arch, as long as you > > configured the kernel correctly. I'm not familiar with mknbi. > > > You said above that you built it on the client. Why would you want > > to build it on the server for the client? Besides the fact that the > > server is faster, I mean. ~:^) > > I'm planning to remove all disks from the clients to use them for > /home on the server (buying new disks is not an option at the moment, > given that the budget of our department doesn't even cover costs for > periodicals in the library). It would thus be nice to compile kernels > for the clients on the server.
That depends on your definition of `nice.' I don't see what having the clients be diskless has to do with compiling the kernel on them. I run my SS20 with NFS root and everthing else, most of the time, even though I have two disks, because a 10/100 network card + cheap x86 NFS server is actually a faster disk combo than the local disks. I compile kernels on it all the time. I also run netscape. ~:^) > > Andreas Jaehnigen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > elftoaout -o vmlinuz-2.2.14.net vmlinuz-2.2.14 > > That bit was new to me. So to make a network bootable image on sparc > one doesn't use mknbi-linux? How is the functionality of mknbi-linux > achieved here (i.e. -d rom -i rom and initrd (not that I need the last > one, just curious))? I don't know why that would be necessary, but I load my kernel off the disk, then use an NFS root. However, I've got a completely diskless x86 laptop that I netboot and I didn't have to do anything special to the kernel in that case. Perhaps that's apples-2-oranges however. a
