| gabriel rosenkoetter on Thu, 24 Jan 2002 12:00:22 +0100 |
|
On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 11:15:37PM -0500, Chris Beggy wrote: > I'm splitting hairs here over sun's network boot sequence, which > isn't fair. NetBSD does it the way sun does it; debian does it > their own way. I can give you the details off line, if you like. Still not quite sure I get where you're going. On sparc--I haven't seen sparc64, but considering it's basically a newer version of the same firmware, I don't see why it would be different--we use OpenBoot to launch a second stage boot loader which, because it needs to fit either on a floppy or in a bootp packet, doesn't do a whole lot, but sets the processor and busses up and runs the INSTALL kernel, which provides the services you were talking about. Is that not the way things behave for netbooting on sparc64? (If so, I haven't a clue why not... it's the way they behave on sparc and macppc, which, though significantly different machines in general, are logically the same thing when it comes to this.) Do you mean that they take advantage of jumpstart in some way that requires you to type, say, boot -net install at the OK > prompt in OpenBoot? (If Debian doesn't do that, how *do* they do it? We're talking about Debian *Linux* here, right?)) You're welcome to reply privately if you like (though I'm not sure why this wouldn't theoretically be of interest to a LUG :^>). Note that: I'm not trying to pick on you here, just understand what seemed strange about NetBSD/sparc64's installer; I haven't actually *used* NetBSD/sparc64's installer; I've only netbooted NetBSD on macppc and i386; and I've only netbooted (using jumpstart) Solaris 2.6, 2.7, and 8 on sparc64. > I have no doubt the NetBSD'ers can do this! Thanks for the > pointer, and I'll know better than to use "can't" where I should > use "chooses not to in the interest of prioritization" when it > comes to NetBSD! I didn't mean to suggest that having tools available to do something was at all the same as providing something to do it, nor that it's inappropriate for Debian, for instance, to provide pre-made some potential output of those tools, just doing that is sort of not what interests NetBSD folks. (Cf, my comments about Debian NetBSD being a Good Thing conceptually, even if I don't quite agree with their decisions on some points, a few days ago. :^>) -- gabriel rosenkoetter gr@eclipsed.net Attachment:
pgpaywwcpTWYd.pgp
|
|