From owner-freebsd-current  Sun Mar 10 18:30:04 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id SAA11944
          for current-outgoing; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 18:30:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA11912
          for <freebsd-current@Freebsd.ORG>; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 18:29:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.4/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA22541; Sun, 10 Mar 1996 18:28:23 -0800 (PST)
To: invalid opcode <coredump@nervosa.com>
cc: Frank Durda IV <uhclem@nemesis.lonestar.org>, freebsd-current@Freebsd.ORG
Subject: Re: New kernel 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 10 Mar 1996 17:18:35 PST."
             <Pine.BSF.3.91.960310171755.1843D-100000@nervosa.com> 
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 1996 18:28:23 -0800
Message-ID: <22539.826511303@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-current@Freebsd.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> On Sun, 10 Mar 1996, invalid opcode wrote:
> 
> > How about PASSIVE instead of AGRESSIVE.
> > == Chris Layne ============================================================
=
> 
> How about ASSERTIVE?
> 
> kernel: Would it be okay if I panic'ed now? (y/n)

How about PASSIVE_AGGRESSIVE?  The kernel doesn't actually panic, but
corrupts your files occasionally when you're away on vacation. :-)

					Jordan