On Tuesday 05 December 2006 01:23, david l goodrich wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 10:57:04AM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > It's possible that this has changed with Xen3.?With Xen2 I'm sure using
> > 0x300 didn't work; the linux kernel simply didn't read the partition
> > table from the virtal disk.
>
> Wait, 0x300 actually means something?  What does it mean?  I've
> just been numbering the disks 0x1, 0x2, etc...  the galaxy hasn't
> exploded yet, so i figured i was okay...

Maybe it was the beer but I only caught onto that reference after I posted. 
Similarly, I've been using just 0, 1, 2 etc.

I know under a linux dom0 you have to reference this correctly in either hex 
or as a device but maybe it means something to a linux domU from a NetBSD 
dom0?

Are you running any linux domUs with this config?

Sarton