Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 19:05:17 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org, Dag-Erling =?utf-8?b?U23DuHJncmF2?= <des@des.no>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Call for testing: emu10kx driver for Creative sound cards Message-ID: <20060524190517.shb6l4afz0gkk48c@netchild.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <4473336F.1030900@samsco.org> References: <20060520141209.A2285@free.home.local> <86fyj1kju5.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060523171238.6392afdb@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <867j4clqaj.fsf@xps.des.no> <4473336F.1030900@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> (from Tue, 23 May 2006 10:08:15 -0600= ): > The problem is that Alexander wants these sysctls to only be temporary. > Recall that big thread from a month or two ago about treating sysctls > as an API, and how there was heavy disagreement over how to define > "stable" sysctls that apps could depend on? If a temporary set of > sysctls get put under the dev tree, then it risks becoming permanent, > which is not what Alexander wants. So, either we need to decide what > parts of the sysctl to define as stable, like I asked for in the > previous thread, or we need to pretend that it's not a problem that we > should address, and let you and Alexander continue to argue over the > 'correct place'. When we have a document/place which specifies a stable sysctl API, I =20 can life with putting the temporary ones into the place which =20 Dag-Erling suggested. Bye, Alexander. --=20 Selling GoodYear Eagle F1 235/40ZR18, 2x 4mm + 2x 5mm, ~150 EUR you have to pick it up between Germany/Saarland and Luxembourg/Capellen http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060524190517.shb6l4afz0gkk48c>