ray canfield | 18 Aug 01:59 2005

Quadra 650 // v2.0.2 // remount /

ok,

hopefully a quick question.

I just put on the v2.0.2 binaries 
  (had 1.6.2, before that
       1.4 and before that
       1.2alpha)...  

boots up, goes into single user.

i then `mount -r -w /` 
and it returns w/ :
--------
mount: unknown option -- u
usage: mount_overlay [-o options] /overlay mount_point
--------

there are a wide range of binary updates between 1.6.2 -> 2.0.2
so i am thinking this procedure has changed.
what am i screwing up here?

i have tried several other mount things...
  -t ffs
  using the /sbin/mount_ffs command directly,

thanks
--

-- 
ray                http://www.redrum.org           rcanfiel <at> blade.redrum.org
  "UNIX _IS_ user friendly, its just picky about who its friends are."
(Continue reading)

Riccardo Mottola | 18 Aug 11:44 2005
Picon

serious problems with netbsd-3

Hey,

I just want to report that the current 68k situation on my MacIIci is 
still "a disaster". The current daily kernel of nb3 doesn't even boot 
(mmu trap) while the one I had from june (but with current userland) is 
almost usable. I already sent a PR about this.

I sent a pr that I can't reliably ftp retrieve the tarballs and unpack 
them, getting checksum errors. Not even when using a local LAN server. 
At first I thought about a network problem, but now I believe it could 
be also a disk related problem, since I had troubles expanding a file 
with a correct checksum... Anyway the situation is sad.

-R

Bruce O'Neel | 18 Aug 12:12 2005
Picon

Re: serious problems with netbsd-3

Ouch.  That's not good.

To give another data point.

I weekly grab the NetBSD-current tar files (I'm lazy) and build that
for my Powerbook 540 (LC040) with MKSOFTFLOAT=yes and a replaced ams.c
so that the mouse works correctly.  In general this works ok though
the most recent build I have is from the end of June.  The build from
this past weekend would be ok except I forgot to patch ams.c

In general I find that NetBSD-current is worse than 2.0 in the sense
that I get pretty consistant MMU traps if I'm not running X.  It seems
that console scrolling and my mac have some disagreement.  OTOH, it
could be something else.

Riccardo, is it possible for you to cross build on another system? 
Does someone else have an 030 they can try this on?

If you want I can put my softfloat builds up someplace for you to
download and try.

It is my worry that few enough people will keep mac68k or other m68k
systems running that NetBSD will become unusable just because of lack
of testing.

cheers

bruce

On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 11:44:03AM +0200, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
(Continue reading)

Julio M. Merino Vidal | 18 Aug 12:20 2005
Picon

Re: serious problems with netbsd-3

On 8/18/05, Bruce O'Neel <edoneel <at> sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
> Ouch.  That's not good.
> 
> To give another data point.
> 
> I weekly grab the NetBSD-current tar files (I'm lazy) and build that
> for my Powerbook 540 (LC040) with MKSOFTFLOAT=yes and a replaced ams.c
> so that the mouse works correctly.  In general this works ok though
> the most recent build I have is from the end of June.  The build from
> this past weekend would be ok except I forgot to patch ams.c
> 
> In general I find that NetBSD-current is worse than 2.0 in the sense
> that I get pretty consistant MMU traps if I'm not running X.  It seems
> that console scrolling and my mac have some disagreement.  OTOH, it
> could be something else.
> 
> Riccardo, is it possible for you to cross build on another system?
> Does someone else have an 030 they can try this on?

Last time I tried (can't remember exactly when, but probably was around
May or so), NetBSD-current was broken on my Performa 630 with the
68LC040 chip, spitting MMU traps during boot.  I built the release with
MKSOFTFLOAT=yes.

NetBSD 2.0 worked surprisingly well.  (Also built by me, using
MKSOFTFLOAT=yes obviously.)

I'd blame the microprocessor if I had never got NetBSD working on that
machine, but given that 2.0 worked fine, I'm not so sure it is its fault.

(Continue reading)

Bruce O'Neel | 18 Aug 12:39 2005
Picon

Re: serious problems with netbsd-3

Hi,

How much memory do you Julio, and you Riccardo, have in your systems?

It is interesting that all 3 of us, with different systems, have
the same problem just at different times.

cheers

bruce

On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 12:20:41PM +0200, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
> On 8/18/05, Bruce O'Neel <edoneel <at> sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
> > Ouch.  That's not good.
> > 
> > To give another data point.
> > 
> > I weekly grab the NetBSD-current tar files (I'm lazy) and build that
> > for my Powerbook 540 (LC040) with MKSOFTFLOAT=yes and a replaced ams.c
> > so that the mouse works correctly.  In general this works ok though
> > the most recent build I have is from the end of June.  The build from
> > this past weekend would be ok except I forgot to patch ams.c
> > 
> > In general I find that NetBSD-current is worse than 2.0 in the sense
> > that I get pretty consistant MMU traps if I'm not running X.  It seems
> > that console scrolling and my mac have some disagreement.  OTOH, it
> > could be something else.
> > 
> > Riccardo, is it possible for you to cross build on another system?
> > Does someone else have an 030 they can try this on?
(Continue reading)

Julio M. Merino Vidal | 18 Aug 12:47 2005
Picon

Re: serious problems with netbsd-3

On 8/18/05, Bruce O'Neel <edoneel <at> sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> How much memory do you Julio, and you Riccardo, have in your systems?
> 
> It is interesting that all 3 of us, with different systems, have
> the same problem just at different times.

Mine has 40MB.

--

-- 
Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv84 <at> gmail.com>
http://www.livejournal.com/users/jmmv/
The NetBSD Project - http://www.NetBSD.org/

Bruce O'Neel | 18 Aug 13:01 2005
Picon

Re: serious problems with netbsd-3

Thus idea one, ie, small memory, might be the problem.

My PB540 has 36 meg.

cheers

bruce

On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 12:47:59PM +0200, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
> On 8/18/05, Bruce O'Neel <edoneel <at> sdf.lonestar.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > How much memory do you Julio, and you Riccardo, have in your systems?
> > 
> > It is interesting that all 3 of us, with different systems, have
> > the same problem just at different times.
> 
> Mine has 40MB.
> 
> -- 
> Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv84 <at> gmail.com>
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/jmmv/
> The NetBSD Project - http://www.NetBSD.org/
> 

--

-- 
edoneel <at> sdf.lonestar.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

(Continue reading)

Tim & Alethea Larson | 18 Aug 17:07 2005
Picon
Picon

Re: serious problems with netbsd-3

Bruce O'Neel wrote:
> Thus idea one, ie, small memory, might be the problem.
> 
> My PB540 has 36 meg.

Unfortunately, for these systems that's "big memory".  NetBSD won't be 
much of a contender for embedded/legacy systems if this is the trend. 
That's very sad, because support for older systems is one of the main 
reasons I became interested in NetBSD.

Tim

--

-- 
Tim & Alethea
christtrek.org

Cameron Kaiser | 18 Aug 21:06 2005

Re: serious problems with netbsd-3

(sorry about earlier blank message)

> > Thus idea one, ie, small memory, might be the problem.
> > 
> > My PB540 has 36 meg.
> 
> Unfortunately, for these systems that's "big memory".  NetBSD won't be 
> much of a contender for embedded/legacy systems if this is the trend. 
> That's very sad, because support for older systems is one of the main 
> reasons I became interested in NetBSD.

This is also one of the reasons I still run 1.5 on some of my boxes.

--

-- 
---------------------------------- personal: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
 Cameron Kaiser, Floodgap Systems Ltd * So. Calif., USA * ckaiser <at> floodgap.com
-- Do I look like I just fell off the turnip truck?! -- Ryoga, "Ranma 1/2" ----

Dave Huang | 18 Aug 21:09 2005

Re: serious problems with netbsd-3

On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 10:07:05AM -0500, Tim & Alethea Larson wrote:
> Bruce O'Neel wrote:
> >Thus idea one, ie, small memory, might be the problem.
> >
> >My PB540 has 36 meg.
> 
> Unfortunately, for these systems that's "big memory".  NetBSD won't be 
> much of a contender for embedded/legacy systems if this is the trend. 
> That's very sad, because support for older systems is one of the main 
> reasons I became interested in NetBSD.

Big or small, FWIW, my Centris 660av with 36MB RAM is running fine (42
day uptime) with a 3.99.7 kernel built from July 4 sources. I haven't
tried the netbsd-3 branch on it.

BTW, top says:
Memory: 11M Act, 4100K Inact, 424K Wired, 4156K Exec, 6368K File, 6652K Free
--

-- 
Name: Dave Huang         |  Mammal, mammal / their names are called /
INet: khym <at> azeotrope.org |  they raise a paw / the bat, the cat /
FurryMUCK: Dahan         |  dolphin and dog / koala bear and hog -- TMBG
Dahan: Hani G Y+C 29 Y++ L+++ W- C++ T++ A+ E+ S++ V++ F- Q+++ P+ B+ PA+ PL++


Gmane