RE: new installer
No simon is right on this one. Thie issue is that devfs has no support for
old world macs. We all know devfs is crap too. My solution would be to
remove devfs from the entire installer and try another system maybe using
MAKEDEV. On the di-2.6 project I have been working on, I completely got rid
of devfs. Simon will being making ppc debs for me and I am near finished
getting the kernel to compile the way I want for x86. My intensions are to
have more support for older hardware and switch to a 2.6 kernel and get
better hardware support for like softraid etc.
From: Steve Langasek [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2003 12:55 PM
To: simon raven
Subject: Re: new installer
On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 01:31:27PM +0000, simon raven wrote:
> LET IT BE KNOWN:
> that OldWorld PPC sub-arch will not be supported directly in the new
> i think this sucks.
> 1) there are plenty of still functional oldworld machines out there
> 2) i think it shows an utter lack of consideration for recycling,
> re-use of older hardware and the environment
> 3) is totally irresponsible
> 4) devfs is broken, crufty, and will be totally gone by 2.7 very
> likely, and using this will make oldworld installs impossible (at
> least from d-i; it'll still be possible to install from woody floppies
> and dist-upgrade).
> go ahead and ban my IP or SMTPd, i'm seriously thinking of moving to a
> *BSD now, and i'll make sure that anyone and everyone i know that uses
> oldworlds *DON'T* use debian sarge stable. and maybe even not debian,
> for making such IMO, dumb decisions.
The only person I know has *decided* that Debian won't support OldWorld PPC
in sarge is you. I'm sure that (as with all things around here), if there
are people willing to spend the time to figure out how to make d-i work for
OldWorld Macs, it'll be supported -- and if not, not.
Supporting OldWorld Macs certainly isn't high on *my* priority list, despite
the fact that I have one sitting in my closet; they have always been a pain
to make work with Linux, and no one here is *responsible* to implement
features they won't use, sorry.