From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 2 02:14:10 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C50816A420; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 02:14:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from pittgoth.com (ns1.pittgoth.com [216.38.206.188]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16D6543D46; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 02:14:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (net-ix.gw.ai.net [205.134.160.6] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by pittgoth.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k122sL7W055797 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 1 Feb 2006 21:54:21 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 21:14:00 -0500 From: Tom Rhodes To: Robert Watson Message-Id: <20060201211400.09e9fdb8.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060202011453.Y87763@fledge.watson.org> References: <20060201221213.L87763@fledge.watson.org> <43E134AB.8000600@t-hosting.hu> <20060201222704.G87763@fledge.watson.org> <43E14C53.3060400@rogers.com> <20060202004044.GA99245@xor.obsecurity.org> <43E1586E.6090203@rogers.com> <20060202011453.Y87763@fledge.watson.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mikej@rogers.com, trustedbsd-audit@TrustedBSD.org, gabor.kovesdan@t-hosting.hu, current@FreeBSD.org, kris@obsecurity.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Audit integration into CVS in progress, some tree disruption X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 02:14:10 -0000 On Thu, 2 Feb 2006 01:17:47 +0000 (GMT) Robert Watson wrote: > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Mike Jakubik wrote: > > > Kris Kennaway wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 07:03:31PM -0500, Mike Jakubik wrote: > >> > >>> Personally, i would like to see less "experimental" code in 6.1. Perhaps > >>> it would be better to wait until everyone feels the code is ready? > >> > >> Why do you care if code that is not enabled by default is present in the > >> system? :-) > > > > Well... While you, me, and other viewers of this list may be fully aware of > > the situation, some else who is either new to FreeBSD or missed out on this > > info may try it and possibly be disappointed. Which would ruin their > > experience and/or opinion of FreeBSD in general. I guess if it does make it > > in, it would be a good idea to clearly notify the user that it is still > > experimental, etc.. > > In the past, we've marked features as experimental using a man page note, > e.g., in the mac(4) man page: > > NAME > mac -- Mandatory Access Control > > SYNOPSIS > options MAC > > ... > > BUGS > See mac(9) concerning appropriateness for production use. The TrustedBSD > MAC Framework is considered experimental in FreeBSD. > > And as such in the release notes. However, maybe we could add the following > also: > > - Dependence on defining "options EXPERIMENTAL" in the kernel configuration > file -- if the kernel isn't compiled with the EXPERIMENTAL option, a compile > error warning that it needs to be defined will be generated. > > - When a kernel is configured with an experimental feature, config generates a > warning, similar to the ones it currently generates about GPL'd components, > etc. > > And we should make sure there is a note in the handbook section as well. There is, IIRC. I'll double check to make sure. -- Tom Rhodes