Re: Test 2.2.10 kernel images/modules/etc. for Atari and Mac
Basically, I arrived at the settings on a trial and error basis.
Originally, I had a much smaller drive in the SE/30, on which I had
installed BSD with no problems. On the larger, newer drive I had real
problems installing both BSD and Debian.
Following a message to the list, I was alerted to the parameters and the
problems with the SCSI driver. I "wasted" a few hours tabulating the results
of booting under various settings and simply chose one that gave reliable
results.
It is also worth noting that compiling a custom kernel and adding RAM also
had an influence on things. From my uninformed observations, it seems to be
a timing issue that is influenced by a number of factors.
HTH
Nigel.
----------
>From: Constantine Karbaliotis <constantine.k@home.com>
>To: Nigel Pegram <npegram@ozemail.com.au>
>Subject: Re: Test 2.2.10 kernel images/modules/etc. for Atari and Mac
>Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2000 1:43 am
>
> I have two SE/30's which I have tried in terms of booting 2.2.10; neither
> worked, and so I was interested to see your post. In both cases, they
recognize
> the SCSI drives, but lock up at the point of doing a partition check.
> One has a Quantum internal drive, and the other a Conner drive; same result
(the
> internal drives are used only for the Mac OS and swap partitions). They will
> boot using 2.0.36.
>
> I tried changing the mac5350=4,2 on my machine to 0,3, but got the same
result;
> I suspect that this is specific to the drive, so I was wondering where you
found
> any guidance on how to use this paramater correctly--I have never found any
> documentation. It is important for me to figure out if this is a fix to my
drive
> problems, as I am also running kernel 2.0.36 on an upgraded Mac II quite
> successfully as a router, but cannot upgrade this machine to 2.2.10 and am
told
> it is because Quantum drives are flaky.
>
> Thanks in advance for any guidance.
>
> Nigel Pegram wrote:
>
>> Second, to get the SCSI working reasonably reliably (read: so it lets me
>> actually boot with some reliability) I had mac5380=6,3 in my boot parameter
>> settings. With the new kernel this failed horribly. However, changing he
>> setting to 0,3 worked.
>>
>> It's now sitting in the corner (no it is not in trouble <grin>) waiting for
>> faxes and seems quite happy.
Reply to: