Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 16:53:45 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: sfarrell+lists@farrell.org Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Softupdate for 2.2.6? Message-ID: <199804061653.JAA21621@usr04.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <87af9z2z39.fsf@phaedrus.uchicago.edu> from "sfarrell%2Blists@farrell.org" at Apr 6, 98 02:23:06 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Most of the work is in the interaction with the VM system. > > > > 2.2.x would not be a picnic; some of the assumptions already being > > corrected for in the -current port are based on a unified VM and > > buffer cache model, which is present is -stable, as well. But it's > > cwertainly not outside the realm of possibility for an undergraduate > > student who has half a year of independent study to do something with, > > and no idea what to tackle. > > Hm... does anyone have a sense of what the lifetime of 2.2.x is? > I'm just thinking if it took someone half a year, and 2.2.x would be > dead in 9 months (e.g.), then it wouldn't really be that worthwhile. It would be if you were able to get a Master's degree out of it. 8-). That's certainly not outside the realm of possibility, either. The issues caused by VM and buffer cache unification, alone, would be worthy of study. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199804061653.JAA21621>