>
>On: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 02:31:07 -0700,
>   STEVE LUMOS  <slumos@nevada.edu> writes:
>
> >We just upgraded to the latest snapshot, but can't build a kernel yet
> >(using source supped on the 22nd I think), because I can't find
> >information on what the config line is supposed to look like.
>
>Uh, like ``GENERIC''.... 

I'm sure you noticed below that I did look at GENERIC.  I thought that
the config line used by GENERIC was one of the things that made it
GENERIC, and therefore not a very good example, especially for
determining the syntax.

>options(4) describes MI options, the Red Demon Book has more detail
>about kernel internals and (sort-of) what the options mean, and there
>are config files tailored for each model of DECstation and for
>diskless boot in /usr/src/sys/arch/pmax/conf.
>
>Was there more you wanted to know?

I knew about options(4), and unless I missed it, it does not document
the config line (which has changed within the last month or two).

>Actually, if you get a current sup, NEWCONF is *gone*.  NEWCONF was
>the first ``new config'' file I used when smashing the 4.4bsd/pmax
>kernel code to use the Torek config.

Ah.  I thought it meant "copy and change this to make a new config"
;-)  That was working too until swap changed.  It must have been carried
over on the local source tree somehow.

>  Should I just use what GENERIC
> >uses, or am I supposed to do "root on rz0a type ffs".  What about dumps?
> >Are we currently transitioning?
>
>You can do 'root on rz0a type ffs'  if you want to boot only off rz0a.
>You can do  'root on rz?a type ffs' if you want to boot off any disk.
>There is no transition there.

This is what I wanted to know.  I think my problem is that I'm reading a
lot more into it than is actually there.  Is there any actual advantage
to specifying the root device instead of doing it the GENERIC way?

>Nope.  There is no support for that.  I didn't find any 4.4bsd/pmax
>code for KGDB support (though I may have looked in the wrong place).
>So far I've never found time to write a serial remote-gdb stub...
>if you wanted to write one that would be  really, really neat.

Agreed.  I sort of nosed around at what some of the other ports have,
and decided I needed to gain a bit more experience before I even looked
at that.  

Thanks for your help.

Steve