Btw, there has been some issue with OpenBSD and 3gx aui. None of which
have manifested with NetBSD flop. I think this is worth a mention.

Cheers,
BUGO Founder

BSD Users Group of Orlando: http://bugo.zepa.net 
IRC: #BUGO on Efnet
--- 
"I used to spend lots of time thinking about how to make Unix operating
systems more secure. The focus of my attention was 4.4BSD, particularly OpenBSD 
(before I discovered that the project was run by a sociopath)..."
(Thomas H. Ptacek, 99)

On Tue, 20 Jul 1999, David Brownlee wrote:

> 	Could I persuade anyone to contribute the text for a NetBSD/sparc
> 	FAQ entry on this - what you can and can't do and what you should
> 	expect? :)
> 
> 		David/absolute
> 
>                   -=-  "Maybe god will cover up his eyes"  -=-
> 
> On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Preston Vega wrote:
> 
> > I didnt mean to imply that you can fsck your fs with nbsd flop. I only
> > mean that you can MOUNT a fs that needs to be fscked. Being that theonly
> > two options are obsd and nbsd flops (obsd wouldnt mount, nbsd did) I found
> > that nbsd flop is really handy. 
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > BUGO Founder
> > 
> > BSD Users Group of Orlando: http://bugo.zepa.net
> > ---
> > "Linux is something for Windows haters, BSD is something for Unix lovers"
> > (Heike S., Febr. 98) 
> > "Beneath revolution (Linux) there's also evolution (*BSD)" 
> > (Andre Oppermann, Apr. 98) 
> > "I view Linux as something that's not Microsoft-a backlash against
> > Microsoft, no more and no less."
> > (Ken Thompson, 99)
> > 
> > On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> > 
> > > In article <Pine.NEB.4.05.9907190857001.2227-100000@7thsun.piermont.com>,
> > > Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net> wrote:
> > > >On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Preston Vega wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Btw, the syboot NetBSD flop makes an excellent recovery diskette for those
> > > >> with Solaris installed. I was rather impressed. I tried to mount the fs
> > > >> with an obsd diskette and it didnt work. NetBSD flop mounted it even
> > > >> though it needed to be fsck'ed.
> > > >
> > > >Err...is it still the case that you shouldn't fsck, or even mount
> > > >R/W, a solaris partition under NetBSD? Or was it the other way
> > > >around? I understood that one writing the other would mean the
> > > >other could no longer read it, but I forget which direction this
> > > >went in.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Ok. here's the scoop:
> > > 
> > > Filesystems created with < Solaris-2.7 that do not have ACL's work fine.
> > > If you have ACL's and you fsck under NetBSD, you'll blow your ACL's.
> > > If you don't fsck and you mount under NetBSD, you risk corruption.
> > > 
> > > Solaris 2.7 also supports journalling. If you have turned this on and you
> > > mount a Solaris-2.7 filesystem under netbsd (I have not tried that), you'll
> > > lose any data that was in the transaction log, plus ACL's, plus other things
> > > that I am not aware of.
> > > 
> > > christos
> > > 
> > 
>