From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Mar 17 13:54:11 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from ceia.nordier.com (m2-2-dbn.dial-up.net [196.34.155.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 747FA15619 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 13:53:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rnordier@nordier.com) Received: (from rnordier@localhost) by ceia.nordier.com (8.8.7/8.6.12) id XAA02196; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 23:50:49 +0200 (SAT) From: Robert Nordier Message-Id: <199903172150.XAA02196@ceia.nordier.com> Subject: Re: KVA size changes in 3.1-stable In-Reply-To: from Chuck Robey at "Mar 17, 99 02:34:32 pm" To: chuckr@mat.net (Chuck Robey) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 23:50:46 +0200 (SAT) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG [Cc trimmed] > > > How long since you last used disklabel to update your bootblocks? Old > > > ones will do that (they did for me, using 2.2.6 bootblocks a while > > > back). > > > > I'm really skeptical that the loader problems you experienced had > > anything directly to do with the 2.2.6 bootblocks. I have a machine > > here, still running 2.2.5-RELEASE, and regularly test loader on > > it. To double-check, I just upgraded the bootblocks to 2.2.6, and > > loader works fine. > > I'm not an expert on that part, but I followed instructions I had from > Mike (I was aware that a screwup could wreck my machine, so I was very > careful) and the first time, it refused to boot the elf kernel. I > booted the aout one, got more advice, did the disklabel, tried it again > with no further changes, and it worked. Perhaps you're right, it's > something else, but you can probably see why I think like I do. Sure, it's known as "jumping to conclusions". :-) > I'm not going to go stick the old bootblocks back .... is it possible > that something since has changed with the bootblocks, so that the > failure I saw wouldn't even occur any more? I suppose loader may have changed in some small way that is nevertheless significant. There's always the possibility that some benign bug may have become less than benign in unusual circumstances that the particular bootblocks contributed to. The explanation just doesn't fit either the theory, or most of the data points here. That doesn't mean the explanation is wrong, just that it will tend to be *regarded* as wrong. :-) -- Robert Nordier To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message