On Sun, 19 Nov 2000, Mike Smith wrote:
> > > > Using what I consider to be a artifact of another operating system on a
> > > > machine that doesn't use that OS seems silly to me. Unless, of course,
> > > > that artifact has some useful feature(s) or functionality. If it does, I'm
> > > > all ears.
> > >
> > > What "you consider" doesn't have much bearing on the situation. As for
> > > useful functionality, this has been done to death. It should be enough
> > > for you to accept that the platform requires it
> >
> > Except that it doesn't, as 'dangerously dedicated' mode shows.
>
> "DD" mode has never worked properly. Ever since it's been in existence,
> it's show that a valid slice table is necessary.
>
> > >, and that a goodly slice
> > > of platform-compliant firmware and software will fail in undesirable ways
> > > if it's not present. All of which has been explained in excruciating
> > > detail before.
> >
> > Except that the software hasn't always required it previously, and it
> > previously did not fail.
>
> It has, and it previously did fail.
>
> > Some would call this 'regression', but I suppose others will call it
> > 'progress'.
>
> Some would just call it "making stuff work", which is the whole point of
> the exercise.
This is a really long thread indeed.
Could someone sum it up, and say why the current way isn't good?
The sysinstall asks and warns about the "DD" mode, isn't that sufficient?
--Roman Shterenzon, UNIX System Administrator and Consultant
[ Xpert UNIX Systems Ltd., Herzlia, Israel. Tel: +972-9-9522361 ]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
