Subject: Re: renaming /boot to /boot_
To: None <>
From: Jonathan Stone <jonathan@DSG.Stanford.EDU>
List: tech-kern
Date: 09/30/1999 00:46:02
In message <>Jaromir Dolecek writes
>"Chris G. Demetriou" wrote:
>> however, there's still the issue of consistency.  There's no reason
>> the bootxx_* blocks should look for different secondaries
>> ...
>So that booting off floppy using new bootlock with hard disk
>with old ones will work ?

Is this x86 or sparc? On other machines I use, if you boot from
floppy, you're gonna get the 2nd-stage bootblock from the floppy, not
the hard disk. Hm. Isnt that how i386 works, too?