Subject: Re: i386 floppy no longer fits
To: None <email@example.com, kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
From: Ross Harvey <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/11/1999 15:28:16
> From: Michael Graff <email@example.com>
> Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU> writes:
> > | Can't a CDROM boot a 2.88MB file system?
> > Assuming we're talking i386 here, I believe it can - the problem with
> > goinng that route is in having different boot setups for floopy and cdrom
> > boots, which would be nice to avoid, if there's any way to avoid it.
> > Having the floppy and cdrom boots behave exactly the same way is nice.
> You already have a difference, in that floppies go in the floppy
> drive, and CDROM's go into the CDROM drive. :)
> Seriously though, I'd not worry too much about the differences. I'd
> rather have them be seperate if it made sense, rather than keeping
> them identical just for sake of doing so.
Ahh, and the difference is less than you think. If you are using a two-disk
ustarfs, the actual kernel+ramdisk knows nothing about it, i.e., it is the
same. So, on alpha, we have the exact same kernel+internal_ramdisk serving:
* netboot of installation kernel (the raw install kernel)
* CD, harddrive, or tape boot (these all have the same FS image)
* floppy (same install kernel, different FS layout for 2-disk ustar)
To repeat: all use the exact same install kernel bits.
I don't even see what the big deal is, anyway, it's just another directory
under distrib/i386. But AFAIKT you will use the same install bits.
In fact, the two floppy boot should actually _merge_ some of the variation
that currently exists on i386: you would no longer need a different install
kernel for 1.2MB media. (Though it won't help the other problem, the split for
small RAM systems.)