On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Mikhail T. <mi+t...@aldan.algebra.com> wrote: > 07.07.2010 16:34, Randi Harper ???????(??): >> >>> Attached is the kernel config-file (i386), that worked fine under 7.x. >>> The >>> kernel-compile will break (some *freebsd7* structs undefined), without >>> the >>> COMPAT_FREEBSD7 option. Try it for yourself... >>> >> >> Don't use a kernel config from 7. We've already told you this. >> > > Your "telling" me this is just as valid as warning me against using > computer-cases of a particular color. It is a silly requirement. My > expecting things, that worked for 7, to work in 8 is reasonable. There may > be (documented!) exceptions, but it ought to "just work". >>> >>> Yes, your way is fine. But so is mine. It is perfectly reasonable to >>> expect >>> my method to work just as well -- the 7->8 is not revolutionary, but >>> simply >>> the next step. I read the "UPDATING" file and, though annoyed a little, >>> took >>> care of things mentioned in there... The remaining things are enumerated >>> here... >>> >> >> Your way clearly isn't fine, as it doesn't work. >> > > That's an obviously flawed argument -- this line of thinking can be used > against ANY ONE reporting ANY BUG -- if one has a problem, then one's way of > doing things "clearly isn't fine". >> >> These changes aren't gratuitous. Did you read the commit messages >> behind each of the changes? I'm guessing that you haven't. >> > > No, and I'm not going to. A commercial OS would've been the laughing stock, > if one hand to change C: to 1: between releases, for example... >>> >>> Again: this particular change seems gratuitous. >>> >> >> It's not. You didn't bother researching before complaining. > > I bothered to type up my list. Presumably, problem-reports are welcome. I've > been a Unix-user since 1990, a FreeBSD user since 1993 (or 94?), and a > project-member for a decade. If *I* have a problem, then newer users > certainly will too. And, guess what, they'll simply go with something, that > does not give as much grief... >> >> To put it in simple terms, there were changes made to geom, and the way >> that >> sysinstall writes out dedicated disks wasn't compatible. Search the >> mailing list archives. >> > > If this is a known problem, it is even more of an outrage, that some shim > was not introduced to keep the users from hitting this particular bump. >> >> The modification should be necessary. > > Why? Why should a netboot act differently from a local boot from CD?
There's a lot of secret sauce done for detecting whether or not you're booting from CD vs pxebooting in a release image, as well as within the sysinstall application as to what environment its dealing with, as well as what you get after things are done with a vanilla build and a sysinstall install (as I've discovered on my own). Unfortunately assuming both methods to produce the same result is flawed :(... Thanks, -Garrett _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-usb To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-usb-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"