From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 10 02:10:42 2003 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 8B57116A4CE for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 02:10:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpzilla5.xs4all.nl (smtpzilla5.xs4all.nl [194.109.127.141]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D526543D1F for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 02:10:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from wkb@freebie.xs4all.nl) Received: from freebie.xs4all.nl (freebie.xs4all.nl [213.84.32.253]) by smtpzilla5.xs4all.nl (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id hBAAAbiL070465; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:10:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from freebie.xs4all.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freebie.xs4all.nl (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id hBAAAb3k049187; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:10:37 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wkb@freebie.xs4all.nl) Received: (from wkb@localhost) by freebie.xs4all.nl (8.12.10/8.12.9/Submit) id hBAAAbhP049186; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:10:37 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wkb) Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:10:37 +0100 From: Wilko Bulte To: eqe@cox.net Message-ID: <20031210101037.GB49141@freebie.xs4all.nl> References: <200312092243.02269.eqe@cox.net> <20031210054413.GA58841@just.puresimplicity.net> <200312100454.13107.eqe@cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200312100454.13107.eqe@cox.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-OS: FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE X-PGP: finger wilko@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: why support alpha?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: /dev/null@freebie.xs4all.nl List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:10:42 -0000 On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 04:54:13AM -0500, eqe@cox.net wrote: > On Wednesday 10 December 2003 00:44, you wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 10:43:02PM -0500, eqe@cox.net wrote: > > > Isn't alpha dead? Why bother supporting them in 5.2 it seems like wasted > > > energy. Yes people still use it but for them there is 4.9 which works > > > fine. You could better serve the freebsd community by focusing on the > > > future of computing like amd64, great dual support, better drivers, etc. > > > and most people know this, so why not let alpha die. I personally like > > > alpha but it has no future. ... > community by concentrating our efforts on just platforms that are more > mainstream in the server market. I personally would stop dev. on anything > lower than a PII for 5.2. Its not abandonment it's just progress, their are > greater issues at hand that need attention like smp. Futher more netbsd will > always support them as well as 4.9. so I don't really see any great loss > here. I support a lan that has mostly modern equipment but it does have two > 586 on the network. on one of them I have 5.1 running on it just for fun, but > considering that getting more ram for the system would cost co. more than the > mashine is worth it is really dead and when anything breaks in it. those 486s > will see the dumpster w/o question. Ever heared about embedded systems? Followups to /dev/null -- | / o / /_ _ |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte wilko@FreeBSD.org