Daniel == Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Daniel On Friday 09 January 2004 10:04, Greg Shenaut wrote:
In nuntio [EMAIL PROTECTED], Michel TALON
divulgat: By the way, what's the reason that it is impossible to
have just one floppy which boots FreeBSD kernel, allows to see an
On Wednesday 21 January 2004 00:43, David Gilbert wrote:
I agree. The boot floppy tries to do w a y too much. I think we
should think of the boot floppy as way to implement an old-style
console emulator: it boots and you tell it where to read the
*real* boot image from. It should
Daniel == Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Daniel True.. Although I believe the loader could do it just as well
Daniel and it's already imported :)
Daniel (It uses the BIOS to read the kernel, and groks PXE, although
Daniel I am hazy on the specifics)
I think the loader understands
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 01:12:25PM -0600, William Grim wrote:
If it's really such a big deal to get rid of floppy support, how about
we get rid of it and make sure an older version of FreeBSD 4.x/5.x is
always available for download? This way, floppy users could install an
older version of the
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 09:24:38PM +0100, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
* Brooks Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-01-11 11:02 -0800]:
If you could make this work such that you just stuffed GENERIC and the
mfsroot onto however many floppies it takes, I think that would almost
certaintly solve re's
On Monday 12 January 2004 07:22 am, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 09:24:38PM +0100, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
I don't know the release build process, so I don't know how much
effort is neccessary to create such floppies, but the loader seems to
have all features needed to use
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 08:26:22AM -0800, Wes Peters wrote:
On Monday 12 January 2004 07:22 am, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 09:24:38PM +0100, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
I don't know the release build process, so I don't know how much
effort is neccessary to create such
On Monday 12 January 2004 01:21 pm, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 08:26:22AM -0800, Wes Peters wrote:
On Monday 12 January 2004 07:22 am, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 09:24:38PM +0100, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
I don't know the release build process, so I
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 01:12:25PM -0600, William Grim wrote:
: If it's really such a big deal to get rid of floppy support, how about
: we get rid of it and make sure an older version of FreeBSD 4.x/5.x is
:
Wes Peters wrote:
Faster than loading a single ISO image with only the boot information and
sysinstall and booting from that, rather than 3 (or 4 or 5) floppies? A
CD-R is cheaper, faster, more reliable, and you don't have to keep
feeding them into the machine.
I think you're missing the
On Sunday 11 January 2004 12:27 am, Paul Robinson wrote:
Perhaps I'm missing something, and I can see why abondoning the current
method in 5-6 years would be reasonable, but I don't see the immediate
advantage of making the change right now.
So you'll be signing up to do the floppy release
Wes Peters wrote:
So you'll be signing up to do the floppy release engineering, and to
modify the kernel so it can load the boot-device modules dynamically.
That's great news!
If the kernel changes don't support the established distribution format,
the kernel changes are broken, not the
Paul Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Understood. I just think saying let's get rid of floppies is
shooting a dog that happens to be near to hand because you don't like
that dog, to stretch the analogy.
I don't think you have any idea how difficult it is (and has been for
a couple of years
* Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-01-11 10:19 +0100]:
Paul Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Understood. I just think saying let's get rid of floppies is
shooting a dog that happens to be near to hand because you don't like
that dog, to stretch the analogy.
I don't think you
I also don't think it's the issue that needs to be dealt with -
distribution is much, much, MUCH bigger an issue than shall we get rid
of floppies? I sent this to the list before, but it got ignored, so
I'll send it again, where Jordan points out we have bigger issues to
deal with when
On 8 Jan 2004, at 14:39, Leo Bicknell wrote:
Then, to replace the current floppy process, a new floppy installer
is created. It may or may not be based on FreeBSD, but what it
needs to be able to do is boot, load a network driver, configure
the network, and ftp the above mentioned iso into ram,
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 10:27:46AM +0100, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
* Dag-Erling Smørgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-01-11 10:19 +0100]:
Paul Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Understood. I just think saying let's get rid of floppies is
shooting a dog that happens to be near to hand because
Marco van de Voort wrote:
I also don't think it's the issue that needs to be dealt with -
distribution is much, much, MUCH bigger an issue than shall we get rid
of floppies? I sent this to the list before, but it got ignored, so
I'll send it again, where Jordan points out we have bigger issues
* Brooks Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-01-11 11:02 -0800]:
If you could make this work such that you just stuffed GENERIC and the
mfsroot onto however many floppies it takes, I think that would almost
certaintly solve re's problems with floppies (i.e. if all they had to do
when the
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 09:24:38PM +0100, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
Now, who wants to give this a try?
OK, I tried now the following:
I made copies of the 4.9 RELEASE Floppies, split the half of the
kernel and mfsroot to another floppy and added two appropriate
splitfiles.
Afterwards
* Avleen Vig [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-01-11 13:34 -0800]:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 09:24:38PM +0100, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
Now, who wants to give this a try?
OK, I tried now the following:
I made copies of the 4.9 RELEASE Floppies, split the half of the
kernel and mfsroot to
Peter Jeremy wrote:
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 04:26:54PM -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 02:23:58PM -0700 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
yes, we need something like
struct pci_device_info {
uint32_tpciid;
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 10:57:56PM +0100, Martin Nilsson wrote:
This discussion is just like when the i386 support was removed from the
GENERIC kernel, a lot of noise about old systems that wouldn't be able
to run (or benefit) from FreeBSD 5 anyway.
There's a big jump between i386 systems and
* Richard Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-01-09 20:59 -0500]:
Richard Coleman wrote:
I apologize if this is a dumb question. But rather than using two
floppies during the install process, why not three or four?
Richard Coleman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry, I just got caught up on the list,
On Friday 09 January 2004 09:34 pm, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Michel TALON wrote:
Sincerely FreeBSD developers have more important tasks than spending
hours to fit an installable system on floppies. When FreeBSD used
one floppy, it was tolerable to do floppy installs.
Wes Peters wrote:
On Friday 09 January 2004 09:34 pm, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Michel TALON wrote:
Sincerely FreeBSD developers have more important tasks than spending
hours to fit an installable system on floppies. When FreeBSD used
one floppy, it was tolerable to do
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On Thursday 08 January 2004 18:20, Avleen Vig wrote:
I understand it is difficult to maintain the floppies. I wish I
understood them better :-) Is it not possible to have ftp install
floppies, which do nothing more than simple FTP installations?
It wouldn't make it any
On Friday 09 January 2004 17:32, Scott Long wrote:
Scott also said stuff like SCSI cards won't get probed if a module is
loaded but I can't see why that is true.. The module will load, the
device get detected, and then sysinstall is told to reprobe the hardware,
so it should pick it up.
* Scott Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-01-09 00:02 -0700]:
Well, except when mfsroot.gz becomes too large to fit on a single
floppy. Right now it is about 90k away from that. What happens when
mount_nfsv4 gets put on there? John Baldwin and I already spent a
day over the holiday break making
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 05:50:59PM +1030 I heard the voice of
Daniel O'Connor, and lo! it spake thus:
I don't necessarily agree here - I think sysinstall is a better place because
it's much much easier to write stuff for it than the loader. In the example
you mention the only reason to use
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On Friday 09 January 2004 17:32, Scott Long wrote:
Scott also said stuff like SCSI cards won't get probed if a module is
loaded but I can't see why that is true.. The module will load, the
device get detected, and then sysinstall is told to reprobe the hardware,
so it
Scott Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Incorrect. Scanning SCSI buses is something that does not happen
automatically. There is magic in the boot process that makes it happen
near the end, right before the kernel looks for the root device.
However, that is the exception to the rule. If you
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 12:48:55AM -0700 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
Daniel O'Connor wrote:
BTW Does camcontrol rescan cause the devices to be detected? Perhaps
sysinstall could be enhanced to perform this duty as part of it's
reprobe machinations.
See my
On Friday 09 January 2004 19:37, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
2) use pciconf -l (or direct access to /dev/pci) to retrieve the PCI
IDs of unclaimed devices, look them up in a list of supported PCI
devices, and load the appropriate module.
You know, when I wrote the code in sysinstall to
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 02:00:40PM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
You still need the right drivers, ie which SCSI controller/network/... cards
you have to get a minimal install is _more_ when you are doing FTP (you need
a network).
Out of around 300+ installs of FreeBSD I've done over the
Leo Bicknell wrote:
I'm going to propose a different solution that was brought up about
two years ago (although I can't find it now).
You start with something like the CD boot image mentioned, that is
a 3-5 Meg iso image that basically contains what is now on the
floppies (perhaps with a
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) writes:
: 2) use pciconf -l (or direct access to /dev/pci) to retrieve the PCI
:IDs of unclaimed devices, look them up in a list of supported PCI
:devices, and load the appropriate module.
There's some
M. Warner Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) writes:
: 2) use pciconf -l (or direct access to /dev/pci) to retrieve the PCI
:IDs of unclaimed devices, look them up in a list of supported PCI
:devices, and load the appropriate module.
There's some
There are several documents linked off of http://www.freebsd.org/releng
that describe how to build a release. It's not nearly as arcane of a
process as it used to be 5 years ago. The biggest barrier to entry is
probably disk space. You'll need a good 5GB free to hold the CVS repo,
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Diomidis Spinellis wrote:
I presume the above means a PXE *client*. This would be cool, but by no
means trivial. I looked at this in the past when I wanted to network
boot FreeBSD on a couple of machines that did not support a boot ROM and
reached a dead end; I ended up
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:50:59PM -0800 I heard the voice of
Avleen Vig, and lo! it spake thus:
While it is indeed true that most machines since 1997 will support this
CD format, please take in to account:
And, further, some of us
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 04:38:11PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
M. Warner Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) writes:
: 2) use pciconf -l (or direct access to /dev/pci) to retrieve the PCI
:IDs of unclaimed devices, look them up in a list of supported
Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The (conceptually) simplest approach would be for all drivers to
advertise the PCI IDs that they can support (together with a priority)
in a manner that would allow such a list to be generated automatically.
yes, we need something like
struct
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 08:30:17PM -0800, Avleen Vig wrote:
A simple website which lets you choose what drivers you want (anyone
seen the .muttrc config page? :)
That should be really easy to do with a little perl CGI.
I might take a crack at this in the next week or so.
FWIW, Plan-9 (
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 10:52:08AM +0100, Daniel Lang wrote:
Matthew D. Fuller wrote on Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 01:58:11AM -0600:
[..]
And, further, some of us don't have (and don't want) CD burners, and even
if we had 'em, don't want to burn (no pun intended ;) a CD blank just to
install an OS,
Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Keep in mind that older systems probably won't boot over the network
without a netboot ROM or similar. The netboot ROM images are (or
were) in the distribution but aren't much use without an EPROM
burner.
I believe that in most cases you can dd the ROM
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The (conceptually) simplest approach would be for all drivers to
advertise the PCI IDs that they can support (together with a priority)
in a manner that would allow such a list to be generated automatically.
yes, we need
Julian Elischer wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:50:59PM -0800 I heard the voice of
Avleen Vig, and lo! it spake thus:
While it is indeed true that most machines since 1997 will support this
CD format, please take in to account:
And, further, some
This is getting stupid!
This discussion is just like when the i386 support was removed from the
GENERIC kernel, a lot of noise about old systems that wouldn't be able
to run (or benefit) from FreeBSD 5 anyway.
And, further, some of us don't have (and don't want) CD burners, and even
if we had
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Scott Long wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
Here at Vicor, we have over a thousand machines spread over about
20 sites. About 10 of those machines have cdrom drives. Our plans call
for moving from 4.x to 5.x, probably at the end of 2004, maybe early
2005.
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Martin Nilsson wrote:
This is getting stupid!
Here at Vicor, we have over a thousand machines spread over about
20 sites. About 10 of those machines have cdrom drives. Our plans call
for moving from 4.x to 5.x, probably at the end of 2004, maybe early
2005.
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 10:57:56PM +0100, Martin Nilsson wrote:
This discussion is just like when the i386 support was removed from the
GENERIC kernel, a lot of noise about old systems that wouldn't be able
to run (or benefit) from FreeBSD 5 anyway.
No, this is nothing like that.
And,
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 02:23:58PM -0700 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
yes, we need something like
struct pci_device_info {
uint32_tpciid;
charbrand[64];
charmodel[64];
}
Scott Long wrote:
All,
Every FreeBSD release cycle in the past year has hit bumps due to install
floppy problems. This is becoming more and more of a burden on the
Release Engineering Team, as we simply do not have the resources to
constantly battle the floppies.
FreeBSD/i386 is the only port
Richard Coleman wrote:
Scott Long wrote:
All,
Every FreeBSD release cycle in the past year has hit bumps due to install
floppy problems. This is becoming more and more of a burden on the
Release Engineering Team, as we simply do not have the resources to
constantly battle the floppies.
Somewhere around Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 17:11 , the world stopped
and listened as [EMAIL PROTECTED] graced us with
this profound tidbit of wisdom that would fulfill the enjoyment of
future generations:
--
Message: 16
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 22:57:56 +0100
From:
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 02:08:08PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
PXE boot against an automated backup/restore service would be much more
useful for this.
Assuming they have PXE and a supported card..
One point that hasn't been made here against PXE (well, not against it,
but not in favour
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Michel TALON wrote:
And, further, some of us don't have (and don't want) CD burners, and even
if we had 'em, don't want to burn (no pun intended ;) a CD blank just to
install an OS, when we can just (re-)use 2 floppies and do it across the
LAN from a local FTP mirror,
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 04:26:54PM -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 02:23:58PM -0700 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
yes, we need something like
struct pci_device_info {
uint32_tpciid;
char
All,
Every FreeBSD release cycle in the past year has hit bumps due to install
floppy problems. This is becoming more and more of a burden on the
Release Engineering Team, as we simply do not have the resources to
constantly battle the floppies.
FreeBSD/i386 is the only port left that generates
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 12:35:01AM -0700, Scott Long wrote:
So, this is something to consider before 5.3. After that, we are
stuck with the consequences of whatever we choose (or don't choose) for
the entire 5.x lifespan. I do not cherish the thought of fighting
floppies for another 2-3
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:50:59PM -0800 I heard the voice of
Avleen Vig, and lo! it spake thus:
While it is indeed true that most machines since 1997 will support this
CD format, please take in to account:
And, further, some of us don't have (and don't want) CD burners, and even
if we had
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 01:58:11AM -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:50:59PM -0800 I heard the voice of
Avleen Vig, and lo! it spake thus:
While it is indeed true that most machines since 1997 will support this
CD format, please take in to account:
And,
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:50:59PM -0800 I heard the voice of
Avleen Vig, and lo! it spake thus:
While it is indeed true that most machines since 1997 will support this
CD format, please take in to account:
And, further, some of us don't have
Hi,
Matthew D. Fuller wrote on Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 01:58:11AM -0600:
[..]
And, further, some of us don't have (and don't want) CD burners, and even
if we had 'em, don't want to burn (no pun intended ;) a CD blank just to
install an OS, when we can just (re-)use 2 floppies and do it across the
Hi Matthew and others
I think that we all can find reasons to (or not to) use floppies,
but I don'tthink that was the issue in Scott's mail.
The generational change from 4.x to 5.x where the majority of the
code hasbeen rewritten (in my opinion an extremly healthy sign for any kind of
serious
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 02:05:14AM -0700 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
For 5.x we already have a 3rd floppy that is dedicated to modules.
Unfortunately, it doesn't work nearly as well as it should because there
is no way to activate it during the boot sequence; it
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 02:05:14AM -0700 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
For 5.x we already have a 3rd floppy that is dedicated to modules.
Unfortunately, it doesn't work nearly as well as it should because there
is no
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 03:43:55AM -0700, Scott Long wrote:
Well, regardless of how you label it, these floppies still require lots of
care and feeding in order to work. We currently have no way to support
multiple floppies in a convenient way. This can be fixed in a variety
of ways that
I'm going to propose a different solution that was brought up about
two years ago (although I can't find it now).
You start with something like the CD boot image mentioned, that is
a 3-5 Meg iso image that basically contains what is now on the
floppies (perhaps with a few more drivers/modules)
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 04:14:51AM -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 02:05:14AM -0700 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
For 5.x we already have a 3rd floppy that is dedicated to modules.
Unfortunately, it doesn't work nearly as well as it should
Scott Long wrote:
FreeBSD/i386 is the only port left that generates install floppies.
Their primary purpose is to fascilitate installing FreeBSD on systems
where a CDROM is either not available or is incompatible with the
'Non-Emulated El Torito' boot method that we use on our CDs. Systems that
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 09:39:34AM -0500, Leo Bicknell wrote:
It would require a whole new floppy booter setup, but I can see
other OS projects using something like this as well, so perhaps
some cross work with NetBSD or OpenBSD, or even the Linux camp could
make an open source load an image
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 01:22:38PM +0100, Martin Nilsson wrote:
Are you aware that the FreeBSD CD:s (both 4.9 5.2) are not bootable on
a CD-ROM connected via USB? Both try to boot but hangs somewhere in the
loader. This is on our P4 Supermicro serverboards. As usual Win2K, 2K3
RedHat just
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:50:59PM -0800 I heard the voice of
Avleen Vig, and lo! it spake thus:
While it is indeed true that most machines since 1997 will support this
CD format, please take in to account:
And, further, some of us don't
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 12:35:01AM -0700, Scott Long wrote:
All,
Every FreeBSD release cycle in the past year has hit bumps due to install
floppy problems. This is becoming more and more of a burden on the
Release Engineering Team, as we simply do not have the resources to
constantly
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 04:36:47PM +, Ceri Davies wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 12:35:01AM -0700, Scott Long wrote:
All,
Every FreeBSD release cycle in the past year has hit bumps due to install
floppy problems. This is becoming more and more of a burden on the
Release
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 10:52:08AM +0100, Daniel Lang wrote:
Hi,
Matthew D. Fuller wrote on Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 01:58:11AM -0600:
[..]
And, further, some of us don't have (and don't want) CD burners, and even
if we had 'em, don't want to burn (no pun intended ;) a CD blank just to
Hi All,
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 12:35:01AM -0700, Scott Long wrote:
All,
Every FreeBSD release cycle in the past year has hit bumps due to install
floppy problems. This is becoming more and more of a burden on the
Release Engineering Team, as we simply do not have the resources to
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 05:56:22PM +0200, Narvi wrote:
And, further, some of us don't have (and don't want) CD burners, and even
if we had 'em, don't want to burn (no pun intended ;) a CD blank just to
install an OS, when we can just (re-)use 2 floppies and do it across the
LAN from a
Need necessitates effort?
- Original Message -
From: Avleen Vig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How you made the jump from I don't want to buy a CD burner to install
FreeBSD to I will be a floppy maintainer I'm not sure. :-)
This e.mail is private
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Steven Hartland wrote:
Need necessitates effort?
Precicely. Or even more precicely - the RE team provided an alternative
path to eliminating floppy support which they could cope with. It follows
that people who want floppy support should work towards that because the
other
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scott Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: My offer for a 'floppy
: maintainer' is quite sincere; I hope that someone takes an interest and
: steps up to the challenge.
I think people misunderstand Scott's call here. He's not saying that
the project doesn't
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 02:05:14AM -0700 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
For 5.x we already have a 3rd floppy that is dedicated to modules.
Unfortunately, it doesn't work nearly as well as it should because
there
Brooks Davis wrote:
I think it would be really cool if someone would add a feature to
disk 1 to become a PXE install server. It should be fairly straight
forward other then dealing with sysinstall.
I presume the above means a PXE *client*. This would be cool, but by no
means trivial. I looked
On Thursday 08 January 2004 11:36 am, Ceri Davies wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 12:35:01AM -0700, Scott Long wrote:
All,
Every FreeBSD release cycle in the past year has hit bumps due to install
floppy problems. This is becoming more and more of a burden on the
Release Engineering
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 10:48:24PM +0200, Diomidis Spinellis wrote:
Brooks Davis wrote:
I think it would be really cool if someone would add a feature to
disk 1 to become a PXE install server. It should be fairly straight
forward other then dealing with sysinstall.
I presume the above
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 03:43:55AM -0700 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
Well, regardless of how you label it, these floppies still require lots
of care and feeding in order to work. We currently have no way to
support multiple floppies in a convenient way.
My hope
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 07:36:10AM -0800 I heard the voice of
Avleen Vig, and lo! it spake thus:
If I understand you right..
A floppy boot, which loads the absolutely basic stuff (network drivers,
and some easy way to config the network) and then goes and grabs the
installer would otherwise
And, further, some of us don't have (and don't want) CD burners, and even
if we had 'em, don't want to burn (no pun intended ;) a CD blank just to
install an OS, when we can just (re-)use 2 floppies and do it across the
LAN from a local FTP mirror, which is as fast as a CD drive anyway.
Brooks Davis wrote:
No, I mean a server. The hard part about using PXE to install a box is
setting up the other box to boot the box your are installing on. It's
not all the difficult, but it require a bit of knowledge, some grunt
work, and a reasionable UNIX-like machine to start from. What
Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 03:43:55AM -0700 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
Well, regardless of how you label it, these floppies still require lots
of care and feeding in order to work. We currently have no way to
support multiple floppies in a
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 04:10:38PM -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 07:36:10AM -0800 I heard the voice of
Avleen Vig, and lo! it spake thus:
If I understand you right..
A floppy boot, which loads the absolutely basic stuff (network drivers,
and some easy way to
In nuntio [EMAIL PROTECTED], Michel TALON divulgat:
By the way, what's the reason that it is impossible to have just one
floppy which boots FreeBSD kernel, allows to see an unbootable cdrom
and continue installation from here?
I agree. The boot floppy tries to do w a y too much. I think we
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 03:36:42PM -0700 I heard the voice of
Scott Long, and lo! it spake thus:
Unfortunately, there are two problems with this.
Now,
The first is that it runs after the kernel has already booted, so SCSI
devices that are handled by drivers on this floppy won't get probed.
On Thursday 08 January 2004 18:20, Avleen Vig wrote:
I understand it is difficult to maintain the floppies. I wish I
understood them better :-) Is it not possible to have ftp install
floppies, which do nothing more than simple FTP installations?
It wouldn't make it any easier.
You still need
On Friday 09 January 2004 10:04, Greg Shenaut wrote:
In nuntio [EMAIL PROTECTED], Michel TALON divulgat:
By the way, what's the reason that it is impossible to have just one
floppy which boots FreeBSD kernel, allows to see an unbootable cdrom
and continue installation from here?
I agree.
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 02:04:34PM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
*How* does it support all of those sources?
CD/DVD drives need drivers (ATA optimisticly, but quite possibly SCSI),
FTP/NFS need network card support, NFS needs nfsclient.ko
ie this is the exact problem it has now :)
You could
On Friday 09 January 2004 15:00, Avleen Vig wrote:
onto floppy disks easily so users can grab what they need and use it
instead of having to second guess what sort of hardware they are likely
to be using. IMHO of course 8-)
Now you've got me thinking.
A simple website which lets you
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 03:28:11PM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On Friday 09 January 2004 15:00, Avleen Vig wrote:
onto floppy disks easily so users can grab what they need and use it
instead of having to second guess what sort of hardware they are likely
to be using. IMHO of course 8-)
1 - 100 of 101 matches
Mail list logo
