NetBSD <= 4.0.1 @ i80386SX - usability ?

Additional operating system/hardware discussion (Windows, Linux, *BSD and others)
Forum rules
Any posts concerning pirated software or offering to buy/sell/trade commercial software are subject to removal.
User avatar
ClassicHasClass
Donor
Donor
Posts: 2221
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 7:12 pm
Location: Sunny So Cal
Contact:

Re: NetBSD <= 4.0.1 @ i80386SX - usability ?

Unread postby ClassicHasClass » Mon May 07, 2018 7:36 am

miod wrote:You don't need FFS_EI unless you intend to mount NetBSD filesystems created on big-endian systems.


You're kidding. There are people who don't need big-endian filesystem support?

( :mrgreen: )
smit happens.

:Fuel: bigred, 900MHz R16K, 4GB RAM, V12 DCD, 6.5.30
:Indy: indy, 150MHz R4400SC, 256MB RAM, XL24, 6.5.10
:Indigo2IMP: purplehaze, 175MHz R10000, Solid IMPACT
probably posted from Image bruce, Quad 2.5GHz PowerPC 970MP, 16GB RAM, Mac OS X 10.4.11
plus IBM POWER6 p520 * Apple Network Server 500 * RDI PrecisionBook * BeBox * Solbourne S3000 * Commodore 128 * many more...

User avatar
escimo
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 4:07 am
Location: Frankfurt/Main, Germany
Contact:

Re: NetBSD <= 4.0.1 @ i80386SX - usability ?

Unread postby escimo » Mon May 07, 2018 8:28 am

miod wrote:Using explicit numbers is only useful if you want to force numbering, or to make sure only one instance of the driver attaches on busses which can't be probed reliably enough. In particular, everything attaching "at isa?" (not "at isapnp?") should have an explicit number.
The system has only one ISA bus. Is there a "perceptible" perf degradation besides the "probing reliability" ("xxx at isa0"), if used?

miod wrote:You don't need FFS_EI unless you intend to mount NetBSD filesystems created on big-endian systems. Removing this option will shrink the code a bit more.
I want to mount FFS filesystems created under NetBSD on the SS2 on the i386 box. - Of course, it's a "nice-to-have" feature which don't come in use in more than 90% of my tasks. Because of this I get a "perceptible" perf degradation as well, I guess. :mrgreen:

Mmm, maybe this means ... " ~~~ One more night! Please give me one more night ~~~" :mrgreen:
SNI: PCD-4H (sphinx), PCD-4G (<noname>), PCD-3Msx (cupido)
SUN: SPARCstation 2 (toosy), Ultra 60 (<noname>), Blade 2000 (betsy)

User avatar
escimo
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 4:07 am
Location: Frankfurt/Main, Germany
Contact:

Re: NetBSD <= 4.0.1 @ i80386SX - usability ?

Unread postby escimo » Wed May 09, 2018 2:17 am

Last evening I installed a DDS tape drive for to know if the new NetBSD kernel recognizes devices on the SCSI bus: indeed!

20180508_234333.jpg

20180509_103316.jpg

CF cards are easier to change than hard disks, for sure. "New" CF hard disk (no flash) installed as prerequirement for installing MWC Coherent 4.2.10 - free memory "5712KB", mmm :o

20180509_011343.jpg
SNI: PCD-4H (sphinx), PCD-4G (<noname>), PCD-3Msx (cupido)
SUN: SPARCstation 2 (toosy), Ultra 60 (<noname>), Blade 2000 (betsy)

User avatar
miod
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:44 am
Location: Clermont-Ferrand (France)
Contact:

Re: NetBSD <= 4.0.1 @ i80386SX - usability ?

Unread postby miod » Thu May 10, 2018 11:24 pm

escimo wrote:
miod wrote:Using explicit numbers is only useful if you want to force numbering, or to make sure only one instance of the driver attaches on busses which can't be probed reliably enough. In particular, everything attaching "at isa?" (not "at isapnp?") should have an explicit number.
The system has only one ISA bus. Is there a "perceptible" perf degradation besides the "probing reliability" ("xxx at isa0"), if used?

There will be no difference between writing "foo0 at isa?" and "foo0 at isa0". However, there is an important difference between "foo0 at isa?" and "foo* at isa?": the "foo0" flavour makes sure that, once foo has been found and attached, the foo probe routine will never get invoked again. This will shorten the boot time a tad teeny bit.
:Indigo:R3000 (alas, dead) :Indigo:R4000 x4 :Indigo2:R4400 :Indigo2IMP:R4400 x2 :Indigo2:R8000 :Indigo2IMP:R10000 :Indy:R4000PC :Indy:R4000SC :Indy:R4400SC :Indy:R4600 :Indy:R5000SC :O2:R5000 x3 :O2:RM7000 :Octane:2xR10000 :Octane:R12000 :O200:2xR12000 :O200: - :O200:2x2xR10000 :Fuel:R16000 :O3x0:4xR16000 :A350:
among more than 150 machines : Apollo, Data General, Digital, HP, IBM, MIPS before SGI, Motorola, NeXT, SGI, Solbourne, Sun...

User avatar
escimo
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 4:07 am
Location: Frankfurt/Main, Germany
Contact:

Re: NetBSD <= 4.0.1 @ i80386SX - usability ?

Unread postby escimo » Fri May 11, 2018 4:09 am

Merci miod pour le retour. Cela devrait être gardé à l'esprit ou même éclairer les sources. Salut, Stephan
SNI: PCD-4H (sphinx), PCD-4G (<noname>), PCD-3Msx (cupido)
SUN: SPARCstation 2 (toosy), Ultra 60 (<noname>), Blade 2000 (betsy)


Return to “Miscellaneous Operating Systems/Hardware”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests