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>