Discussion on the future of floppies in 5.x and 6.x

[Richard Coleman]

Richard Coleman wrote:

> Scott Long wrote:
> 
>> All,
>>
>> Every FreeBSD release cycle in the past year has hit bumps due to install
>> floppy problems.  This is becoming more and more of a burden on the
>> Release Engineering Team, as we simply do not have the resources to
>> constantly battle the floppies.
>>
>> FreeBSD/i386 is the only port left that generates install floppies.
>> Their primary purpose is to fascilitate installing FreeBSD on systems
>> where a CDROM is either not available or is incompatible with the
>> 'Non-Emulated El Torito' boot method that we use on our CDs.  Systems 
>> that
>> cannot boot these CDs are typically those that are also not certified for
>> WinNT4, Win2K, or WinXP.  Thus, nearly all machines produced after 1997
>> can boot our CDs.
>>
>> It is certainly possible to run FreeBSD 5.x on machines of this and prior
>> vintage, and I certainly do not want to dispute or question any motives
>> here.  However, the number of machines in this category is steadily
>> declining as time goes on, while the effort put into supporting install
>> floppies seems to be on the rise.  I certainly do not want to orphan 
>> these
>> machines, so we need to find a compromise.
>>
>> One solution is to find a dedicated 'floppy maintainer' that will
>> frequently assess the floppies during the normal developement periods and
>> work closely with the Release Engineering team to ensure that there are
>> few surprises when it's time to cut a release.  I would expect this 
>> person
>> to develop and execute a test plan that covers all of the common aspects
>> of installing via floppy: basic sanity checks, loading drivers, 
>> installing
>> via the various mechanisms, etc.  This person should also be comfortable
>> with modifying makefiles and the sysinstall source.
>>
>> The other solution is to replace install floppies with an 'Emulated El
>> Torito' CD image.  I'm not going to go into the differences between
>> 'non-emulated' and 'emulated' except to say that 'emulated' is the method
>> used on FreeBSD 4.x (and prior), Win95, and Win98.  Virtually every 
>> system
>> in existance that supports a CDROM supports this method.  This image 
>> would
>> contain the loader, kernel, and MFS root, just like the current
>> 'bootonly.iso' image, but would be configured for emulated booting.  
>> Users
>> could download this image, burn it, boot it, and then install FreeBSD 
>> just
>> like they normally would.  Of course this adds the requirement of needing
>> a CD burner, but these devices are becoming common enough that it could
>> be a reasonable expectation.
>>
>> Switching to this method doesn't entirely remove the headache of release
>> floppies, but it does make it signficantly easier to deal with them.  The
>> 'emulated' method actually uses a 2.88MB floppy image that combines the
>> first two 1.44MB floppies that we traditionally produce.  By combining
>> them, we have a bit more flexibility since the driver modules that are on
>> the second floppy can go back into the kernel image and benefit from the
>> compression that happens there.
>>
>> So, this is something to consider before 5.3.  After that, we are
>> stuck with the consequences of whatever we choose (or don't choose) for
>> the entire 5.x lifespan.  I do not cherish the thought of fighting
>> floppies for another 2-3 years.  I'm happy to work with someone who steps
>> forward and is committed to maintaining the floppies as they are today.
>> Otherwise, we need to seriously consider the alternative.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Scott
> 
> 
> I apologize if this is a dumb question.  But rather than using two 
> floppies during the install process, why not three or four?
> 
> Richard Coleman
> richardcoleman at mindspring.com

Sorry, I just got caught up on the list, and see that this has already 
been discussed.  Ignore the question.

Richard Coleman
richardcoleman at mindspring.com