On Thu, 4 May 2000, Simon J. Gerraty wrote:

> > So, certainly keep the images as small as is reasonably possible,
> > but whatever size is needed for a single ffs image, please allow it
> > to grow to that big, and keep that version (in addition to whatever
> > is done for those who do use floppies to boot - and when other
> > measures eventually fail to allow a single floppy boot system).
> 
> I think its time to introduce a sparc/floppyfs? to cater for that
> niche.  And let bootfs grow within reason.  Does _anyone_ boot sparc's
> off floppy?
> 
	Definitely. Its very convenient if you do not have a unix machine
	on the same network.

	The i386 port has several 'floppies' - a tiny, small, standard,
	and 'big'. I dont see any reason why the sparc port couldn't
	do the same.

	Just curious - what is the compelling reason to keep it ffs
	rather than ustarfs?

		David/absolute
				       -- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --