Subject: Re: (old thread revived) which of these is supported
To: jeff <>
From: Michael Wolfson <>
List: port-macppc
Date: 06/28/2001 22:48:56
At 8:26 PM -0500 6/27/01, jeff wrote:

:)It seems that you asked a few times during the past few months which
:)of the newer machines is supported.

Yup, that's right.  I was trying to update the docs for 1.5.1, but it's a
continual thing, where I keep the webpages and docs up to date.

:)I have an Early 2001 iMac (Dalmation).


:)I also have played with NetBSD on an old Performa 6360 and a Powerbook G3
:)Series (both of which work, more or less, as you know).


:)and it booted right into the installer (after decompressing the image).
:)In fact, I was shocked at how quickly I got it to boot after having such a
:)hard time (last Summer) on the laptop and the Performa.

Experience ;)  It is a true shame that we can't come up with an easier
bootloader (or import Darwin's).

:)But, as I mentioned earlier, it doesn't seem to recognize the existence of
:)my hard drive at all :-\
:)I also tried the network setup in the utilities menu and it didn't
:)recognize the existence of any network either...

As mentioned already on the list, your dmesg output implies that the new
devices aren't being found.  It sounds like they're behind a new PCI
bridge.  Hopefully one of the kernel hacker dudes will help you out and
send test kernels.  You should be able to boot test kernels from CD-R, your
hard drive, or over ethernet, since loading the kernel is done via Open
Firmware, and doesn't rely on NetBSD's finding the right devices.

If you're really desperate, you could try to find a bootable USB drive and
try running NetBSD from it, since you said that USB looked OK.  Then it'd
be much easier to build and test new kernels that might support your

:)Have you heard from anyone who has netbsd running on the newe iMac?

Nope, as far as I'm aware, you're the first to try any iMac newer than the
original 1999 (Slot Loading) model.  That is, no reports on the (Summer
2000) or (Early 2001) models other than yours.

:)PS  I like the improvements in the web site docs since last year.
:)Much clearer and easier to understand.  :)

Thanks for the kind words!

Good luck getting it working (and, of course, let me know when it does!).

  -- MW