> > I guess the main lesson is that "boot device support varies among
> > the different Alpha system models".
>
> Not true, really; remember that the srm console is loadable software.
> What you should have said was that the support varied between versions
> of the SRM software.

Hm, that can be misunderstood to mean such things as "SRM version 5.5
has support for <blah> as a boot device" without qualifying it with
the system model.  Since the SRM software is system model specific,
such general statements cannot be made.  Since writing SRM software is
not something anyone else than Compaq/Digital is doing, I would say
that in practice the first statement above is also true, but I'd also
agree that at this point we're splitting hairs.

- H=E5vard