Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.pop.psu.edu!ctc.com!news.mic.ucla.edu!ux1.lmu.edu!s069.infonet.net!s069.infonet.net!not-for-mail
From: burgess@s069.infonet.net (Dave Burgess)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development
Subject: Re: users - not entirely clear on the concept
Date: 12 Jun 1994 09:55:35 -0500
Organization: Dave's House in Omaha
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <2tf7l7$2jk@s069.infonet.net>
References: <Cr8EBv.BDM@hippo.ru.ac.za> <2t7beb$p0n@menudo.uh.edu> <2tamoa$22 <2tdcdo$58u@news.ysu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: s069.infonet.net
In article <2tdcdo$58u@news.ysu.edu>,
Christopher L. Mikkelson <ap713@yfn.ysu.edu> wrote:
>
> This is good. I have used three UNIX (free, of course) systems already,
>And I've noticed that: 386bsd 0.1 installed reasonably easily, and had
>enough to keep me interested for a while, Linux installed itself practically,
>but was rather a pain for me to work (read: play) with, and FreeBSD (read:
>God over all free UNIX systems :) required a fight to install, but was worth
>it.
> In the earlier install, are the default disk geometry parameters fixed?
>I've installed FreeBSD 1.0R on three systems, and the defaults were all
>wrong. I had to boot linux and use its fdisk program to find out what
>numbers to use.
>
This kind of mirrors my experiences. To be honest, the best way I have
found to install (or reinstall) NetBSD is the use the 386bsd 0.1
install disk and install 386bsd first. Once it is installed, and I am
CERTAIN that the disk geometry problems are fixed, I install NetBSD
over it. I understand that it is kind of brute force, but ease of
installation is not one of the most critical parts of the system (IMHO,
I just use it).
This problem with the Disk Geometries is probably THE single biggest
problem the the *BSDs. I understand WHY it's a problem, and those of
you that have tried to install know this. Once again, the FAQ goes
into a LOT of detail about the "how to" and "what for" of the disk
geometry problem, but still it would be nice if it weren't such a
problem.
Linux's way of dealing with the problem (allowing the BIOS to be
active, or something like that) is probably good for Linux; from what I
recall of the great "I'd give you an F" debate in comp.os.minix, the
reason is to avoid the specific problem that we have caused ourselves
in BSD. It has its costs, but it works.
The 'pfdisk.exe' program that has raced around the net (and is probably
on one or more of the CD-ROMs) should probably become a LOT more
predominant. With this in hand, the user KNOWS what the disk geometry
is going to be BEFORE DOS has a chance to get in and muck it up.
The installation problems of today are simply harder to solve than the
old ones. If they were easy, we would have fixed them by now. We will
keep at it, though, to persevere against an implementation problem and
solve it is part of why we are here.
--
TSgt Dave Burgess | Dave Burgess
NCOIC, USSTRATCOM/J6844 | *BSD FAQ Maintainer
Offutt AFB, NE | Burgess@cynjut.infonet.net or ...@s069.infonet...