The Great Mr. Kurtz [David A. Gatwood] wrote:
> > > > > Oh, one thing I forgot - in addition to the mount root/not clean problem,
> > > > > when I try to use the installer on that disk, and I do an 'ls' it says
> > > > > something about bad inodes and dies.  Not a good sign, but that doesn't
> > > > > happen once I'm in BSD, so I used 'hfs' to copy all the tarballs to the
> > > > > BSD side and installed them from there.
> > > > 
> > > > Hmmm....bad inode or no such inode?  I get some kind of "no such file"
> > > > type error all the time in the Installer, but it doesn't crash...I'd
> > > > recommend using hfs anyway, though.  It's _alot_ faster than the
> > > > Installer.
> > > 
> > > I get this too, but only on the partition that I newfs'ed from the NetBSD
> > > side.  I think NetBSD's newfs must default to the newer level 2 (I think
> > > that's the right number) filesystems, which the installer doesn't support
> > > at this time.  (Perhaps the default should be changed until such time as
> > > it does?)  If you use newfs, try specifying the filesystem revision level
> > > on the command line (man newfs for details).  Of course that's only
> > > speculation, there could easily be other reasons, that just seems the most
> > > likely guess.
> > 
> > Ah, yes!  I had forgotten about that.  The level 2 ffs created by newfs is
> > incompatible with the installer...something else to go into the FAQ if
> > it's not already there ;-)  As for changing the default, since newfs is
> > pretty much architecture independent, I'm not too sure they other ports
> > would like us messing with their newfs ;-)
> 
> I assume mac68k distributes some of the /etc files separately, right?  How
> about something like "alias newfs 'newfs -whatever'" (forgive the lousy
> syntax) in root's profile or something?  Or another possibility, tweak the
> newfs code so the default is changable with a makefile option, then change
> the option for mac68k compiles....
> 

Well, athough I don't think that the Bourne shell supports aliasing
(although ours is POSIX compliant, whatever that means ;-)...I'm still not
too sure that kind of thing is the real answer.  Rather, it should
probably be documented somewhere like the manual page (which I'll assume
that it is) and maybe the INSTALL doc.  If a user doesn't read the docs, I
don't think we're obligated to protect him from himself (besides, if he
hit's this snag, he's probably just done it, and it's rather easy to fix
at this point without losing any data).

Later.

-- 
Colin Wood                                 cwood@ichips.intel.com
Component Design Engineer - MD6                 Intel Corporation
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I speak only on my own behalf, not for my employer.