Subject: Re: various changes on INSTALL and iso generation
To: Manuel Bouyer <email@example.com>
From: Chavdar Ivanov <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/27/2007 13:06:46
On 27/02/07, Manuel Bouyer <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 11:27:36PM -0800, Erik Berls wrote:
> > [cc: - port-i386]
> > Excelllent. I was considering making ACPI and MP default for
> > port-amd64. With the addition of -NOMP and -NOACPI kernels. The
> > mailing list seemed to errupt in a thread about ACPI breaking on a
> > large number of machines, so I aborted, and then didn't have time to
> > revisit.
> > Can we get MP added as a default?
> It's already available from the list of kernels to install, I'm not
> sure if it's a good idea to make it the default. The performance hit
> is noticeable on UP machines. Ideally sysinst should be able to make
> SMP or UP the default after detecting the number of CPU, but that's
> another story.
> > How much of these fixes can get pulled up to netbsd-4? (eg. if we
> > are able to patch for the dell, etc..)
> I intend to get these in netbsd-4. But I have some more changes to do to the
> iso build infrastructure first.
I finished build.sh release for 4.99.13 a few hours ago on amd64 with
the diff applied. The resulting ISO booted fine and recognized
everything to be recognized, but could not be used for installation as
there was no MAKEDEV.subs present in /dev, just MAKEDEV (that was the
message I got when I tried ./MAKEDEV all in /dev). Have I done
> Manuel Bouyer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference