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

Re: MILO size problems

Rich Payne <rdp@talisman.alphalinux.org> writes:

> Don't forget about the UX boards with ARCSBios, MILO will still be

Doh! forgot about those, thanks.

> necessary for them. Rumor has it that Q has SRM console for the XL series
> (as all the testing was done on OpenVMS) the problem is getting them to
> release it. Also at this point the UP1000 (Nautilus) is dependent on APB,
> though that will be changing.

Yes, I've added a note about the UP1000 to the documentation.
However, it would be nicer if we could provide APB images and add APB
support to dbootstrap.

Can I download APB images from somewhere, and is it possible (read:
legal) for us to distribute them?  Also, in the event that the UP1000
does not require APB in the future, is there any way to tell whether a
UP1000 has been booted from APB or something else?  For MILO we just
look in /proc/cpuinfo (i.e. in the HWRPB :)

Actually I rather like the idea of APB - separating the PALCode from
the bootloader is a good idea...

> DP264 and Nautilus didn't compile with 2.2.14?

Yeah, at least Nautilus didn't when I tried.  Blame Henderson :)
Rich Payne <rdp@talisman.alphalinux.org> writes:

> On Fri, 3 Mar 2000, Christian Meder wrote:
> > But potato will use 2.2.14 presumably.

I do not want to use 2.2.14 for potato, there are many important
bugfixes in 2.2.15, and it will almost certainly be released next

David Huggins-Daines, Senior Linux Consultant, Linuxcare, Inc.
613.562.1239 tel
dhuggins@linuxcare.com, http://www.linuxcare.com/
Linuxcare. Support for the revolution.

Reply to: