From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 9 22:30:52 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 5CAF237B401 for ; Fri, 9 May 2003 22:30:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from puffin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (puffin.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.139]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD4F143FD7 for ; Fri, 9 May 2003 22:30:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from pool0008.cvx22-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.198.8] helo=mindspring.com) by puffin.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (SSLv3:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19EMwb-0002hc-00; Fri, 09 May 2003 22:30:50 -0700 Message-ID: <3EBC8E40.69A472BC@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 22:29:36 -0700 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: chris@pennasoft.com References: <20030508142234.GA1359@laptop.6bone.nl> <3EBB3C67.7F2E5CD8@mindspring.com> <200305091258.51855.chris@pennasoft.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: b1a02af9316fbb217a47c185c03b154d40683398e744b8a45c30b3b0e9084c6c6088bafbdf1e2a403ca473d225a0f487350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: data corruption with current (maybe sis chipset related?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 05:30:52 -0000 Chris BeHanna wrote: > On Friday 09 May 2003 01:28, Terry Lambert wrote: > > Don wrote: > > > > it's not really appropriate to -current any more. Bosko's is > > > > preferred, because it doesn't disclose the nature of the bug, > > > > > > How, exactly, is this preferred? :) > > > > It avoids a lawsuit. > > Who would be the plaintiff, and what would be the basis of the > lawsuit? Intel would be the plaintiff. > And, why aren't Bosko's patches in the tree? I don't know. I do know that they increased the minimum memory requirements by 4M (part of Bosko's approach to a fix requires linking the kernel with a base address aligned on a 4M boundary). -- Terry