Jaromir Dolecek <dolecek@ics.muni.cz> writes:
> > Before sounds right, and i think it should fit...
> 
> Is there any reason why the code should look for /boot at all ?

As opposed to what?  not looking for anything, or just looking for
/boot.${MACHINE}?

Given the alpha's track record of binary compatibility between the
primaries and secondaries, it's perfectly reasonable to think you
could just install a new primary.

also, who's to say, maybe the machine crashes right after you've
installed the new primary, or you forget to install a new secondary or
rename the primary to boot.${MACHINE}.

also, who's to say that the user learns that after the Flag Day
newly-installed bootstraps must be in the new place, and installs
theirs in the wrong place because that's what they've been doing for a
while?


Why be extra-user-unfriendly, when a simple backward compatibility
measure probably isn't too hard?



cgd
-- 
Chris Demetriou - cgd@netbsd.org - http://www.netbsd.org/People/Pages/cgd.html
Disclaimer: Not speaking for NetBSD, just expressing my own opinion.