Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 22:01:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Richard Toren <rpt@miles.sso.loral.com> To: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Rel 2.1 Regular Guy wish list Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950501215322.9768A-100000@miles>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
What I would like to see in 2.1....
Before I give you my list, let me identify myself. I think I am the
type of user you want if you want to reach the Linux size following. I
have:
- I have used/programmed UNIX for 8 years, but want to start to learn
more about the internals.
- 1 system shared by myself and family.
- No real exotic boards. (not even an e-net).
- A 14.4 modem ( I figured out ppp for home and built for my system at
work)
- 500 Mb SCSI disk, purchased specifically for FreeBSD as a second
drive. 400Mb filled ( I researched only the controllers
on your published list for compatability).
- A Conner QIC-80 tape unit (maybe not typical) which I don't
really trust.
- I installed from the 2.0R CD.
- Have done 2 kernel gens to remove some drivers ( the first with
great trepadation).
- Made one patch to the ppp driver after collecting a dozen messages
just to be sure what to do. (then remade the wrong part of the
tree).
- I have installed a number of packages from the Inet. Some worked
some didn't ( ups-2.4.5 failed, pthreads failed, apsfilter failed)
- I do not (presently) write kernel code.
- I am not planning to install an ISDN board.
- To date my system only panics after syncing the disks at shutdown
( big deal).
What I want from the next CD release is:
STABILITY
Quality
packages that are complete for installation
an upgrade path that doesn't wipe out any work I have done so far.
source in text form on the CD to free big chuck of that disk
A boot manager that works when booting from wd0 and trying to get
sd0 (the second drive) to take over. boot from floppy now.
This message has been prompted by my recent experience with
pthreads. I want to experiment with multi-threaded, C++ X
applications. Unfortunately, It appears that the system that the author
tested it on was freefall. And from the message I got today, it seems
that 2.0R just isn't the same. I am not talking subtle things here,
but just the compiler and assembler maybe
>>
>> Is there a difference between building on freefall, and what was deliverd
>> in 2.0R?
>
>Freefall runs a much newer system. Anyway, for work like this you
>would/should better use thud. It runs almost at the bleeding edge of
>-current wisdom, and is dedicated to things like larger compilations
>(while freefall is loaded hard enough with mail, CTM and sup).
Keep the SNAPS and -current for the folks that want to push the
envelope but remember that in order to really grow a customer base,
you probably need 9 'regular guy' users for every kernel/device hacker
(in the context of 1972 MIT dorms, not todays pulp news meaning).
I love my/your system. It does mostly what I want, and I am very
reluctant to do things to it that may break it. Don't force me to go back
and start all over again.
====================================================
Rip Toren | The bad news is that C++ is not an object-oriented |
rpt@miles.sso.loral.com | programming language. .... The good news is that |
| C++ supports object-oriented programming. |
| C++ Programming & Fundamental Concepts |
| by Anderson & Heinze |
====================================================
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SUN.3.91.950501215322.9768A-100000>