Subject: Step sequence with System Disk and auxillary patches
To: None <port-macppc@netbsd.org>
From: Bob Ashley <bob.ax386@gmail.com>
List: port-macppc
Date: 01/28/2005 15:40:11
I'm a newcomer preparing to install NetBSD on a Mac 7600, currently
with OS 8.6. Before proceeding, I'd like to ensure I understand the
first steps of the installation instructions. The following pair of numbered
points (3, 4 & 3, 4) are pasted from pages reference by the main
install notes:

[cited from] "NetBSD System Disk Tutorial"
3.  Mount the Self-Mounting Image and run System Disk

Open the self-mounting image to mount it on your desktop, and locate
the System Disk utility on the disk image. Run this program:

4. NVRAM Patches

When you click the Save button, it installs any necessary nvram
patches for your machine, except for a few minor fixes for
PowerMacintosh 7300 - 8600 machines related to video timing and sync.
There are separate instructions for applying these Open Firmware 1.0.5
patches

[cited from] "NetBSD/macppc Open Firmware 1.0.5 Patch"
3. Mount the Self-Mounting Image

Open the self-mounting image to mount it on your desktop, and locate
the System Disk utility on the disk image.

4) NVRAM Patches (Easy Method)

If you're using System Disk 2.3.1, download this ResCompare System
Disk 2.3.1 OF105 patch.hqx. This program will patch your System Disk
to add some delays to let the video settle properly and always sync up
at 680x480 at 60 Hz (this is apparently the only resolution Open
Firmware supports on these machines)."

Now, the first set of instructions says "and run" (System Disk), but the
second does not. Am I right to assume that first I run System Disk
(hit Save), then run the auxillary patch program afterwards? More simply, is it
"SysDisk" then "patch"?  And, I'm not clear about what "locate" refers to in
the patch notes. Run system disk again? If so, why not repeat the same
instruction as on the tutorial page, i.e., mount and run. If not, then
do I just open the patch program and let it do its thing?

Doubtless I'm overcomplicating the already overcomplicated,
overcomplication raised to a higher exponent. In any case, the
sequence of the 'how's' is not clear in my mind, though I think I
understand the 'why'.

Clarification or insights heartily appreciated.

Thanks,

Bob