> > > Why does Livingston offer a ComOs 3.7 without a Netboot image?
> >
> > I think they get behind. Netbooting is not just a way to bring up broken
>
> No, this is not the case, the fact is that it's simply not important
> for the netboot image to equal the current released image considering
> its purpose.
I do business with a guy who has been into portmasters a lot longer than
me and probably some of the others here. He indicated to ME that
netbooting was an ALTERNTAVE way to configure and operate a portmaster. I
didnt particularly agree, nor did I know if that was true. All I see in
the OLD PM 2 manual is that setting dip swich 2 allows you to netboot. In
the NEW PM 2 manual, it talks about Netbooting as if what you HAVE to do
when the com os becomes corrupt.
Was there EVER a time in which netbooting was suggested OVER prom booting
for some centralized admin reasons?
If not, then I agree, that it really doesn't matter if its 3.5 or 3.7 in
the netboot image. All you want is to get it FUNCTIONING, then you can
flash a new com os and restore your setup.
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
Jake Messinger 713-772-6690 jake@ams.com
Advanced Medical Systems, Inc. jake@uh.edu
8300 Bissonnet #400
Houston, Texas 77074 http://www.ams.com/~jake
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~