Re: pushing netbsd-5 (Was: bootloader)

David Brownlee <[email protected]> Thu, 22 Jan 2009 23:04:25 +0000 (GMT)

Newsgroups	gmane.os.netbsd.ports.atari
Message-ID	<alpine.NEB.2.00.0901222254490.8677@localhost>

 	Actually, regarding kernel naming suggestions...  Why do
 	we have a BOOTX at all? When does it make sense to use
 	BOOTX instead of ATARITT or FALCON? I can understand BOOT
 	as its for a minimal memory machine, but if you have
 	more memory or an 060 you should be using ATARITT or FALCON

 	I'd actually suggest renaming BOOT to SMALL030 or similar
 	to more accurately represent what it is...

 	If we get rid of BOOTX then the only shortname conflict is
 	with netbsd-MILAN-PCIIDE.gz and netbsd-MILAN-ISAIDE.gz...

 	What do people think?

-- 
 		David/absolute       -- www.NetBSD.org: No hype required --