From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Apr 12 15:52:26 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DBC314D34
	for <current@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 12 Apr 1999 15:52:25 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com)
Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA56931;
	Mon, 12 Apr 1999 15:50:35 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com)
To: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>
Cc: current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: About that 'new-bus' stuff. 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 13 Apr 1999 01:56:41 +0800."
             <19990412175644.7DE5F1F4F@spinner.netplex.com.au> 
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 15:50:35 -0700
Message-ID: <56929.923957435@zippy.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Thank you very much for this summary!  Like most people, I don't think
this is a political issue between new-bus and newconfig, it's simply
what we've already got on the Alpha and now need to bring to the x86
 for consistency's sake.

I also suspect that once this code is in -current, and I'd personally
like to see that happen, what eventually evolves from it will probably
represent the best of both newconfig and new-bus, it being the nature
of software to constantly change. :)

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message