From owner-freebsd-current Sat Jan 23 19:34:39 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA00702 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sat, 23 Jan 1999 19:34:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA00690; Sat, 23 Jan 1999 19:34:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from des@flood.ping.uio.no) Received: (from des@localhost) by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.1/8.9.1) id EAA53279; Sun, 24 Jan 1999 04:34:05 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from des) To: Kazutaka YOKOTA Cc: peter@netplex.com.au, sos@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Death to LKM screen savers? (was: Re: HEADS UP: i386 a.out LKM support now an option..) References: <199901171925.DAA06456@spinner.netplex.com.au> <199901240255.LAA24094@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 24 Jan 1999 04:34:04 +0100 In-Reply-To: Kazutaka YOKOTA's message of "Sun, 24 Jan 1999 11:55:19 +0900" Message-ID: Lines: 9 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 19.34 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Kazutaka YOKOTA writes: > What if we declare death to LKM screen savers and remove them from > the source tree? After all KLD screen savers are working well. Sure. I don't see any reason to keep them. I'll do the deed. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message