[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OldWorld Mac-specific problems; perhaps drop?



Hi,

On Tuesday 11 July 2006 12:48, Sven Luther wrote:
> > dfsg-free means to boot the installer on old world, the fact that the
> > only method available for sarge no longer works (BootX; which can't be
> > used on new world machiens) with 2.6.16 kernels, and that the 2.6.16+
> > kernels fail to boot on old world macs

You filed this as #377152 - but there is also netbooting, which might have 
problems on oldworld because of the size of the initrd, see #307232:

Netbooting d-i doesnt work as well. At least for the OF 1.0.5 of my 7200 the 
5.2mb initrd is too big, it works with a smaller (1.2 mb) kernels. According 
to ethereal it hangs after 8169 packets, each 588 bytes in size. This is 
roughly 4mb.

I have no idea where the limit in other machines with a different version of 
OF is - but I would not be surprised to find higher limits. The 7200 is a 
fairly old oldworld modell...

I have not looked into this again myself yet, as I first "concentrated" on 
miboot-floppies...

> The official method of booting oldworld powermacs is using the miboot
> floppies, and altough miboot is currently non-free, work is under way to
> free it, and there are other people here who are working on bettering the
> floppies, please participate to that effort or something.

Also there is support for floppy booting in quik, it just doesn't work at the 
moment. But IMHO there is a realistic chance to make this work so we can have 
it in RC1 or 2.

But even using the current miboot-floppies is not the end of the world... it's 
just non-free :(

> There are rumors that you can use also a .coff kernel+ramdisk and use that
> one to boot those boxes, which would be gully free, but nobody ever
> investigated this.

I dont parse this completly. Which method would this be?

> So what would you gain by dropping support ?

Thats exactly the question :)


regards,
	Holger

Attachment: pgpkXEGIfsG97.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: