Re: enabling -DNAMEBLOCK breaks biosboot build (fwd)

[Daniel C. Sobral]

Steven Kehlet wrote:
> 
> With 3.4-STABLE code, cvsup'd on Tues May 9th, enabling -DNAMEBLOCK in
> /sys/i386/boot/biosboot/Makefile breaks the build:
  ^^^

We no longer use that. I'm surprised it is present at all in 3.4's
source code. Alas... maybe it is an old version that somehow was left
alone by cvsup? Well, anyway, no one is maintaining that code.

> I'd like the NAMEBLOCK feature so I can use nextboot.  Is there a new
> way to boot different kernels, or am I screwed?

Indeed, nextboot is not supported anymore, though one can easily write a
program to do what you want by changing /boot/loader.conf.

Please refer to loader(8), loader.conf(5) and loader.4th(8) man pages
for 3.x+ system bootstrapping.

-- 
Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

"Sentience hurts."




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

enabling -DNAMEBLOCK breaks biosboot build (fwd)

[Steven Kehlet]

Hello, I sent this to -questions but no one could help me.  TIA if you
can help me :-).


With 3.4-STABLE code, cvsup'd on Tues May 9th, enabling -DNAMEBLOCK in
/sys/i386/boot/biosboot/Makefile breaks the build:

  ...
  dd if=boot.nohdr of=boot2 bs=512 skip=1
  14+1 records in
  14+1 records out
  7184 bytes transferred in 0.000439 secs (16362683 bytes/sec)
  boot2 is too big
  *** Error code 2
  
  

I'd like the NAMEBLOCK feature so I can use nextboot.  Is there a new
way to boot different kernels, or am I screwed?

Thanks! :-)

Steve




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message