From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from puffin.external.hp.com (puffin.external.hp.com [192.25.206.4]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8375482A for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 11:34:29 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <200109211731.LAA01939@puffin.external.hp.com> To: Bdale Garbee Cc: parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] 712/60 boots fine In-Reply-To: Message from Bdale Garbee of "Fri, 21 Sep 2001 10:42:51 MDT." <87g09gpkac.fsf@rover.gag.com> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 11:31:51 -0600 From: Grant Grundler List-ID: Bdale Garbee wrote: > Clearly, then, "just" having them documented is insufficient. Agreed - that's why I asked Andreas where he looked. > I noted when doing an install from the 0.9.2 CD myself the other day that we > paint a splash screen before disk partitioning explaining that there needs to > be a palo partition, but that splash screen doesn't mention the 2G issue. > Perhaps it could be updated with some additional text? Excellent idea. Who knows where the disk partitioning text is? (and can someone sign up to "fix" it?) Or perhaps Andreas can file a bug report? Where? > In summary, I think we ought to be thinking about how to help the user get > this right beyond "just" making sure the constraints are documented. Certainly. But we had to start someplace. I'm happy Paul wrote *any* documentation - an excellent set of documentation no less and packaged the whole mess. IMHO, new folks need to get involved for stuff like palo enhancements. I'm sure Paul would welcome any patches people cook up. Most of the original developers have moved on to other things and aren't actively contributing in new features or enhancing existing documents/code. This evolution seems natural since the types of issues outstanding today are quite different than those from one or two years ago. thanks, grant