On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 04:11:14PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote: > On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 04:05:03AM +1000, Jamie Lenehan wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 09:03:19AM -0700, Marc Singer wrote: > > > > I just tftpbooted the images from > > > > > > > > http://auric.debian.org/~bcollins/disks-sparc/current/ [...] > It didn't even get that far. The firmware downloaded the image and > then said it was invalid.
Using the sun4u/tftpboot.img: [nynaeve][ 1:42PM]/tftpboot%> ls -l total 9140 lrwx------ 1 root root 30 Apr 30 22:20 CBD91D9B -> debian-bcollins-2002-10-05.img lrwx------ 1 root root 30 May 4 20:24 CBD91D9C -> debian-bcollins-2002-10-05.img -rw-r--r-- 1 lenehan lenehan 4741476 Apr 30 22:18 debian-bcollins-2002-10-05.img -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4591072 May 19 2002 debian-woody-3.0.23-2002-05-21.img [nynaeve][ 1:42PM]/tftpboot%> md5sum debian-bcollins-2002-10-05.img 41777b6d9f81ebc249bf96894d2de06c debian-bcollins-2002-10-05.img [...] > > Hmmm... That doesn't make sense. I thought 3 had to be the entire > > disk? If you look at my partition table above 3 is the entire disk, > > so 1, 2 and 4 actually overap with 3. > > Why would Linux care about partition three being the whole disk? I > can imagine that Solaris might. I have no idea, I just assumed that was the one true way ;) A quick google seems to suggest that you are correct and it can go anwyhere. I was just working on theory that you seemed to have troubles with accessing the disk after booting, which suggests that maybe it's something in the way it's setup. [...] > > > > 2.5.70 #3 Sun Jun 15 03:08:48 EST 2003 sparc64 GNU/Linux > > That could be part of the problem. I was running linux-2.4.20. The > machine I had was a 500MHz model. I was running 2.4.19 until a few minutes before sending that e-mail. I cannot see any real reason why it wouldn't work though. -- Jamie Lenehan Work Phone: +61 3 9843 8817 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Work Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
