, <port-mac68k@netbsd.org>
From: iMac <wduke@cogeco.ca>
List: port-mac68k
Date: 10/25/2005 11:45:51
on 10/25/05 8:50 AM, thelarsons3@cox.net at thelarsons3@cox.net wrote:
>> also because after
>> some "hardware death" that I am affected from those are the only two
>> reasonable powerful 68k macs that I have currently available, however I
>
> Riccardo, was it you who needed a Q840 power supply? I have one from a
> machine the mobo died on...but the PS is still good.
>
>> think that the sparse coding efforts in mac68k (if someone still codes
>> at all) would be better spent in getting 2.1 into shape again before
>> "stretching" to new platforms.
>
> Yes, it's a sad fact that m68k is dying. I'd rather see support solidified
> for what we have at this point than trying to support a couple oddball
> machines. What exactly is the issue with 2.x? Has anyone nailed it down?
> I've seen reports of "general flakiness" but sporadically - other people say
> it works fine.
>
Normally I would wholeheartedly agree with you, however I happen to own one
of said oddball machines. So, I have just a wee bit of a bias. ;)
Yes, it truly is sad that support for the mac68k is dying; I really like
NetBSD.