[9fans] Not using AHA-2940 .. kind of

[9fans] Not using AHA-2940 .. kind of

[Richard Elberger]

I am hoping to get some feedback on this before I try it -- gotchas etc --
or if it will even work at all.  I already know that the AHA-2940 family is
not supported by plan9 (at the moment).  I have a big IDE disk that I want
to put plan9 on, but I have dos6.2/win2k on the scsi drive.  MSDOS6.2 uses
the first gig on the scsi, and it is has the win2k bootloader information on
it.  I want to use the win2k bootloader to run plan9 off of the IDE.

By using the bootloader on the unsupported scsi mean that plan9 won't run?
My assumption is that it doesn't matter because after the bootloader action
plan9 never needs the scsi goo.  Just would like to confirm if possible.

please advise --

-- rich

[9fans] Not using AHA-2940 .. kind of

[Richard Elberger]

Ok, I am hoping to get some feedback on this before I try it -- gotchas
etc -- or if it will even work at all.  I already know that the AHA-2940
family is not supported by plan9 (at the moment).  I have a huge IDE disk
that I want to put plan9 on, but I have dos6.2/win2k on the scsi drive.
dos6.2 uses the first gig on the scsi, and it is has the win2k bootloader
information on it.  I want to use the win2k bootloader to run plan9 off of
the IDE.

By using the bootloader on the unsupported scsi mean that plan9 won't run?
My assumption is that it doesn't matter because after the bootloader action
plan9 never needs the scsi goo.

please advise --

-- rich

Re: [9fans] Not using AHA-2940 .. kind of

[Russ Cox]

if win2k will boot an os not on the
actual boot drive, then yeah, it should
just work.

you'll have to figure out how to tell
win2k about plan 9, but please let us know
what the steps are.  i'd love to add support
for that to the install script.

russ