Re: new installer
On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 09:01:23AM -0700, Chris Tillman wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 03:54:40PM +0200, Thorsten Sauter wrote:
> > * simon raven <email@example.com> [2003-09-27 15:31]:
> > | that OldWorld PPC sub-arch will not be supported directly in the new
> > | installer.
> > maybe you can tell us, what is needed to support oldworld machines
> > instead of writing such emails.
> > We are working to support must PowerPC machines, but no one of us has
> > such an oldworld machine.
> > For systems which doesn't support devfs there is a devfs wrapper, which
> > handle such archs.
> I have some that can be used for testing, but don't understand all
> that might be needed to make it work. Two things right off the bat,
> 1) Oldworlds need proprietary code to boot CDs, and normally need to
> install from a 1.44 floppy, but the standard 2.4 image doesn't fit; and
Notice that when i asked about this on debian-powerpc, i was told that
the 2.4 kernel could be made to fit on 1.44 floppy disks. In fact, if i
look at the kernel-image-2.4.21 packages, i find that :
- /boot/vmlinux.coff-2.4.21-powerpc is of size : 1299802
- the .coff kernels don't have a udeb at all.
This comes together with a general effort i am doing to get all powerpc
subarches supported by the powerpc kernel, since right now, only newpmac
is supported in the udeb, and only oldpmac and newpmac are supported in
Notice also that i asked questions about this on the debian-powerpc
mailing list, and _nobody_ replied, so i guess nobody really cares, and
thus has the right to make critics here.
So, anyone wanting support for oldpmac (or chrp or prep or chrp.rs6k)
should move itself a bit, try to boot the above mentioned kernel from a
floppy disk, _and_ report back if there is a failure or something.
And, as said, the 2.4.21 oldpmac kernel should be of a size to fit on a
floppy, it just need to be properly packaged in a udeb with quick and
whatever it is needed.
Ah, and yes, Herbert has asked about that, and most probably, there will
be no 2.2.x kernels in sarge, so if you have problems with 2.4.x on your
subarch, please document it, try to provide fixes or anything, don't be
silent about it and then complain when it is too late.