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

Re: Performa 6320CD



On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 05:25:51PM -0500, Rod Ross wrote:
> Well seeing as how I am unemployed former ISSC/CTG IBM employee why not 
> !  I must admit I am acquainted with debian build kernel automation ( I 
> have been making my own for 7401 ppc on debian with make-kpkg for years 
> ). I avoid bitkeeper at all costs. Also, I am confused by the build 
> process on nubus. I understand all modules must be built into kernel and 
> a fake mach header must be patched in ( for mklinux boot loader ) but I 
> feel something was lost  (ppp device ttyS0 , audio etc ) in the transfer 
> to debian's source code  from the bitkeeper repository and kernel  the 
> nubus-pmac.sourceforge.net project was using . I did download ( some 
> months ago ) the debian nubus source and patch but was unable to get a 
> proper build. The build completed but the mach kernel header was lacking 
> from the kernel and the kernel appeared to big. I guess it is time I got 
> back to trying to build nubus again. The boot process only worked using 
> mklinux bootloader for me and I tried them all. I realise a different 
> boot loader ( other than mklinux ) is needed for debian to accept it 
> because it is not free. Also the whole system depends on macos for 
> booting and this would need changing and certainly it is above my head. 
> So perhaps this nubus arch should just fade away ( like old cowboy ). If 
> you decide to proceed with me, please remember these machines are slow 
> and I prefer to build on them rather than cross compile so work on these 
> machines is rather slow.

Do you know if there is any information about how the boot process
works for nubus machines?  Is it different for each model?  I have an
old laptop I'm fond of (a 1400) that I'd like to use to learn about
writing boot programs, but I haven't been able to find any information
with which to begin.  I suppose this is not something that is
documented anywhere.

-- 
Mike Small
smallm@panix.com



Reply to: