Subject: Re: suggested patch to console(4) manpage
To: None <M.Drochner@fz-juelich.de>
From: Jonathan Stone <jonathan@DSG.Stanford.EDU>
List: port-i386
Date: 01/19/2000 10:17:38
In message <200001191139.MAA0000009780@zel459.zel.kfa-juelich.de>
Matthias Drochner writes:

>
>jonathan@Cuisinart.DSG.Stanford.EDU said:
>>  Exactly when did the bootblocks start passing console-device info up
>> to the kernel? 

>This was before 1.3, and it hasn't changed significantly in the meantime.

Thank you. When I update the incorrect manpages, I'll note that.
>> Anyone object to adding pointers to boot_console(4) to
>> the comments in GENERIC about serial consoles?
>
>No. But it is not really appropriate. The information (as far as the
>kernel is concerned) should be in console(4), and if it is insufficient,
>it should be improved there.

Wrong.  Correct information about how bootblocks choose their
boot_console belongs in boot_console(4). Some of the information there
now is wrong, or so atrociously written it reads like the direct
opposite of what it's trying to say.

Information on how kernels inherit their console information from the
bootblocks belongs in console(4).  The text currently there is also
misleading; it focuses on the override mechanism, which (for most
normal purposes) is obsolete.  At least that's what I was told here.
It's 100% appropriate for console(4) to point to boot_console(4).


>[another mail]
>> Seems like the test for the provided "biosboot_com0" bootblocks is
>> exactly inverted: normal "internal" console, unless someone hits a key
>> on the serial console. I cant think of _any_ sane use for that.
>
>The keypress thing shouldn't be used in the provided "biosboot_com0".

Fine. I have no problem with that. My real problem is that
biosboot_com0 simply does not work as advertised, and I'm trying to
figure out how I can get serial consoles to work _AT ALL_ on a current
i386 server motherboard.  That's how I ran into the incorrect crap in
the manpages. (OK, OK, the intent may be correct, but the English text
says something which is simply not true).

I'll reply to the rest separately.