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
_______________________________________________
freebsd-usb@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-usb
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-usb-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to