--=-=-=
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


"Paul (NCC/CS)." <pts@bom.gov.au> writes:

> Greg Troxel wrote:
>
>> not really relevant (U5 vs SS5), but maybe:
>>
>> I have an ultra5 that was stable on netbsd-2 for a long time and
>> started crashing over night.  it turned out to be hardware, and
>> swapping the cpu box fixed it.  I then built netbsd-3 and updated, and
>> it's still fine.  When my father went scrounging in the spare U5 pile,
>> he went through about 3 before he found one that would boot - which
>> was surprising.
>
> Interesting about your Dad though. It just shows that 3.0 is a bit
> picky about what hardware it runs on.

It had nothing to do with 3.0 - the scrounged non-bootable machines
wouldn't even come up into the prom at all.   Once one was found that
was ok in the prom, it ran the exact same code from the old disk just
fine and hasn't crashed since.   So my point was really that U5
hardware is less reliable than one would expect.

=2D-=20
        Greg Troxel <gdt@ir.bbn.com>

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFEl+QN+vesoDJhHiURAhGPAJ9z15m9orH7SXslsEjTdK1wMS19RACfV2HB
qNIe7rEUUxZrM1mycZSIJVc=
=qaBq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--