On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 09:21:24PM -0700, Brian Morris wrote:
> well we haven't had much testing here on 2.6 either, making this big jump.
It's true 2.6 hasn't been solid on 68k. I know I struggle to find the
time to work on it.
> my machine, is lcIII/performa450, is supposed to be somewhat similar
> to or a combination of IIsi and IIci. i think it is rather unhappy over the
> lack of any ethernet at all, as well as it it struggling with lack FPU. but
> sarge/2.2 works. (i am still looking for cheap parts)
I suspect the fpu emulation code is in better shape there, although I
have never tried it myself. All of my boxes have hardware fpu. Has
anyone else on the list tried 2.6 on an 030 box without a 68882?
> as far as disks. so far i have tried on a 500MB ibm scsi1+CCS (~'94)
> drive and a 1.2GB quantum scsci2 ('96). i have a couple 2gb drives but
> i have to clean them up to get some space.
I use a 1.2G quantum fireball in my IIfx. It has been reliable in the
past, but I haven't tried a kernel from the last 6-9 months.
> also, i had some qualms about the formatting software, and studying
> last night some faqs and discussions, deciding to try apple drive setup
> 1.6.2.
> the aforementioned discs, the ibm was formatted with drive setup 1.7.3
> which is not readable by the '030 mac from macos, requires '40 or ppc.
> the quantum i wanted to use as an internal drive so i used hd sc setup
> which has a much simple structure perhaps not secure or causing confusion.
> i had used ds 1.4 to format the internal drive for macos however in my
> reading i saw that in 1.6.2 they used the patch partition to do some kind
> of security against data corruption problems some people were having
> with 1.6; and also there was some backward compatibility worked in for
> '030 in '98. (i know its not macos here but well they are living together
> there on the same disk, it is not so completely separate as all that)
I have several copies of SilverLining laying around, so I usually use
that for 68k rather than the official Apple tools. The hd sc program
should work fine for any SCSI disk as long as you have the hacked one.
> one other question in my mind is if the problem is worse for internal drive.
> should not matter with only one bus, but who knows ?
I can't imagine that internal or external would matter at all, but I
suppose it might be possible.
Brad Boyer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
