Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!metro!ipso!runxtsa!bde From: bde@runx.oz.au (Bruce Evans) Subject: Re: Use of compiled kernels?? Message-ID: <1993Mar2.151152.14950@runx.oz.au> Organization: RUNX Un*x Timeshare. Sydney, Australia. References: <CHRISTIA.93Feb19092705@latenite.ssc.gov> <1993Feb26.204221.14704@delos.stgt.sub.org> <1993Mar1.135229.8433@gmd.de> Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 15:11:52 GMT Lines: 26 In article <1993Mar1.135229.8433@gmd.de> veit@fanoe.gmd.de (Holger Veit) writes: >In article <1993Feb26.204221.14704@delos.stgt.sub.org>, migieger@delos.stgt.sub.org (Michael Giegerich) writes: >|> >The messages on the console are: >|> > >|> >wd0 0:<wdgetctrl failed, assuming ok> >|> > 1:<wdgetctrl failed, assuming ok> at 0x01f0 irq 14 on isa. >|> ... >|> What's the meaning of the message? What's wrong? >The above message is a "novelty" from the new patchkit, and it means that >the "wd" driver tried to find an MFM, RLL, IDE, ESDI drive and didn't find one, >neither for the first nor second disk. No, it means that the wd driver found a drive of the above type but the drive didn't respond to the wdgetctlr() command. At least one (old) MFM controller doesn't respond to the command but works otherwise. 386BSD-0.1 quietly ignores the failure. The 0.1-patchkit quietly assumes that the controller isn't there. I didn't like this, so I changed the patch to noisily ignore the failure. This is in the 0.2-patchkit. >... >But if you do have a non SCSI hard disk, you are in real trouble now. Only if the drive geometry is different from the guessed drive geomety. -- Bruce Evans (bde@runx.oz.au)