From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 30 03:49:02 2004 Return-Path: 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 2B19E16A4CE; Wed, 30 Jun 2004 03:49:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from robbins.dropbear.id.au (232.b.012.mel.iprimus.net.au [210.50.249.232]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7452343D31; Wed, 30 Jun 2004 03:49:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tim@robbins.dropbear.id.au) Received: by robbins.dropbear.id.au (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7D4C84212; Wed, 30 Jun 2004 13:51:42 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 13:51:42 +1000 From: Tim Robbins To: Andre Oppermann Message-ID: <20040630035142.GA28627@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> References: <34706.1088497708@critter.freebsd.dk> <46A7D8A4-C9EF-11D8-99F8-003065ABFD92@mac.com> <40E1AB5B.1090302@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40E1AB5B.1090302@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: Poul-Henning Kamp cc: Charles Swiger cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP: ibcs2 and svr4 compat headed for history X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 03:49:02 -0000 On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 07:48:11PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: > Charles Swiger wrote: > >On Jun 29, 2004, at 4:28 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > > >>In message <40DF2607.5020409@mac.com>, Chuck Swiger writes: > >> > >>>In other words, I care quite a bit about how "working, supported > >>>functionality" gets transitioned to "no longer available". I'm not > >>>happy with > >>>the notion of "supported" -> "HEADS UP" -> one week -> gone. > >> > >> > >>I don't think anybody would be happy with that, and that is not what > >>was proposed in this case. > > > > > >OK. While I thought your original "HEADS UP" was clear, perhaps you had > >a less abrupt transition plan in mind. > > > >If you suggested that the ibcs/svr4 compatibility stuff should be marked > >depreciated for 5.3, and give people until 5.4 time find someone willing > >to do maintenance for the code, or give someone time to move this > >functionality to ports, or find some other alternative, that might > >receive more positive feedback. > > From what I have understood so far is that ibcs/svr4 already *is* broken > in 5-CURRENT. However it does seem to work sufficiently well in 4-STABLE. As far as I'm aware, svr4 and ibcs2 emulation work as well on -current as they ever did on RELENG_4. Tim