Subject: Re: Wakefield CD
To: None <chris@paradox.demon.co.uk>
From: Steve Potts <stevepotts@blastzone.demon.co.uk>
List: port-arm32
Date: 05/06/2001 20:00:45
In message <01050619270404.00327@pinky.paradox.demon.co.uk>
          Chris Gilbert <chris@paradox.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> On Monday 23 April 2001  9:10 pm, Chris Gilbert wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > In a bid to be organised I thought I'd tempt people with what I plan to
> > be on the CD at wakefield (this doesn't mean it'll all make it,
> > experience shows that it doesn't always ;).
[snip]
> 
> It looks like we may have a space problem for the CD. David Forbes has tol 
> me that the packages themselves will fill the whole CD, looking at what I
> aim  to have on it, the CD just ain't big enough.
> 
> So the question is should I cut down what's on the CD?
> 
Probably.
[snip]
> 
> Perhaps I should consider doing 2 CD's?  one with packages on the other
> with  NetBSD on it?  (and buy 1 get 2nd CD cheap?)
> 
> Any thoughts?  What would people prefer?
> 
> Cheers,
> Chris

I am one of probably many who don't know very much about building kernels and
recompiling systems such as X.  My reason for having BSD is to learn more
about Unix and to be able to develop simple C programs initially and then
play with writing TCP/IP applications using sockets.  The system which is
best for me is one which gives me all the binaries for the base system with
compliers and text editors, with X Windows and a few nice tools, not
forgetting the manual pages for all of the above.

I think that if you do a second CD (and it sounds like you should), that the
second CD is the one which should have sources to the system, so that those
who are more experienced or those who want to play with lower level code, can
then choose to have this additional CD.

Having already asked for help previously on this list, I now have one of the
snapshot systems (1.5T) working on my RiscPC, with X Windows.  Not had time
to do anything else with it really though since.

BTW,
I'm having trouble creating a new user account other than root.  I've been
using useradd, but it keeps saying that my passwords I suggest are not legal
ones and says that it set them to "************" does this mean the password
is in fact all "*"s?  That is what is in the password file when I do 
vipw

I thought that passwords were encrypted in this file.

Also, how to I configure the system to know what the root device is when it
boots, it asks me every time and I have to tell it "wd0a"?

Thanks.
-- 
StevePotts@blastzone.demon.co.uk (http://www.blastzone.demon.co.uk/)

Are you sick of Windows PCs crashing?  There are alternatives you know.
http://www.riscos.org/ and http://www.riscos.com/