From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 6 13:32:29 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 4DC7716A4CE; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 13:32:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F03A643D4C; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 13:32:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Received: from freebsd.org (junior-wifi.samsco.home [192.168.0.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i56Kduj1043744; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 14:39:56 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <40C37F3C.1050602@freebsd.org> Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 14:31:56 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040304 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marcel Moolenaar References: <40C36D31.4010003@freebsd.org> <20040606193510.GA95886@dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <20040606193510.GA95886@dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=3.8 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on pooker.samsco.org cc: hackers@freebsd.org cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP! KSE needs more attention 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: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 20:32:29 -0000 Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Sun, Jun 06, 2004 at 01:14:57PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > >>All, >> >>We are about 4-6 weeks away from starting the 5.3 release cycle. As it >>stands, KSE still only works reliably on i386. > > > I don't have any problems on ia64. > Good to hear =-) > >>... I'm willing to drop the alpha requirement and maybe even >>the sparc64 requirement, but there absolutely will not be a 5.3 until >>amd64 is solid. > > > I think sparc64 should have KSE too. If we already accept that sparc64 > is feature incomplete, we set/acknowledge a really bad precedence. > I do too, but there is the difficult fact in that there are few people out there that are willing to work on sparc64. One person offered to try to learn it and tackle it, but that's a lot to ask. As with Alpha, the fate of a platform rests on the people who are willing to work on it, not on whether it is in a particular list. Scott