I vote is to support aboot and worry about MILO later.
Chris Lumens wrote:
>
> > I think that it would be best to use aboot since it's
> > closer to the PAL code that is used for Tru64 and VMS.
> > MILO requires the ARC console, which has it's issues
> > and will soon go away. The other plus for aboot is
> > that the SRM console is faster than the ARC console.
> > For systems that don't have the SRM console, they can
> > install it from the firmware site at Compaq/Dec.
>
> Well if that's the case, I would love to say that we'll only go with
> aboot. At least here in the beginning, we can just support aboot. I
> don't think it's too much to ask that people upgrade their firmware...it
> might solve some other problems too. And if MILO is going away sometime
> soon, I don't particularly want to get involved with it.
>
> Does anyone see this as a problem? My vote for now (assuming we have
> votes) is to only support aboot. MILO could get supported later on,
> assuming there is sufficient need.
>
> --
> Chris Lumens - chris@slackware.com - KG6CIH
> @n=(-42,-85,-83,-19,65,2,-10,-10,-15,-3,2,-10,73,-4,8,-4,2,79,8,17,15,7,14,2);
> print map{chr(-$n[$i++]+ord)} sort(split(//,'place random string here')),"\n";
-- ****************************************************** * Octave J. Orgeron Specializing in : * * Unix Systems Administrator Tru64/Solaris/Linux * * Taos Mountain, Inc. * * www.taos.com Certified Solaris * * unixconsole@yahoo.com Systems Administrator * ******************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri May 09 2003 - 10:00:01 PDT