Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 12:41:29 -0700 From: Dan Allen <danallen46@airwired.net> To: Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> Cc: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>, List FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ACPI broke going from 8 to 9 Message-ID: <F766F156-E1F5-46B2-B58E-0EA164772049@airwired.net> In-Reply-To: <20111231175714.GA48840@icarus.home.lan> References: <1C1E4950-FEAF-48DB-9F38-2408245E16EF@airwired.net> <20111231175714.GA48840@icarus.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 31 Dec 2011, at 10:57 AM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > Do you have a necessary reason to upgrade to 9 given this situation? > Given the conditions I would stay you should stay with 8. This philosophy seems wrong, but it may be the way to go. My Toshiba Satellite U205 used to work great with RELENG_7, but the boot code of RELENG_8 will not recognize the 2nd core of my Core Duo (not Core 2 Duo) processor. Nobody seems to care as few machines have Core Duo, or few people use this era of Toshiba BIOS, or whatever. Now my Dell GX270 ACPI code is pre 2.0 (so Garrett tells me), so RELENG_9 is out. I guess I should run all of my older machines on RELENG_7 but -- and this is where the philosophy you suggest seems wrong -- I still want the latest apps, security fixes, etc. If the stable tree updates ls or tcsh or awk, I want these, but the core OS seems to have moved on from 2004 machines. In other words, there is no tree for me. Dan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F766F156-E1F5-46B2-B58E-0EA164772049>