From owner-freebsd-current Tue Mar 16 18:58:37 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from kot.ne.mediaone.net (kot.ne.mediaone.net [24.218.12.203]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D3CA14FCE for ; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 18:58:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mi@kot.ne.mediaone.net) Received: (from mi@localhost) by kot.ne.mediaone.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id VAA20641; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 21:56:12 -0500 (EST) From: Mikhail Teterin Message-Id: <199903170256.VAA20641@kot.ne.mediaone.net> Subject: Re: latest -current doesn't execute BSDI-binary bladeenc In-Reply-To: from Dag-Erling Smorgrav at "Mar 17, 1999 03:28:24 am" To: des@flood.ping.uio.no (Dag-Erling Smorgrav) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 21:56:12 -0500 (EST) Cc: doconnor@gsoft.com.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Face: %UW#n0|w>ydeGt/b@1-.UFP=K^~-:0f#O:D7w hJ5G_<5143Bb3kOIs9XpX+"V+~$adGP:J|SLieM31VIhqXeLBli" > The bug is on the web site, not in the kernel. I'd consider the web-site a "spec" and the kernel -- "implementation". By this logic, the kernel needs fixing... => > David Greenman committed a patch to better support large memory => > configurations. Unfortunately, it seems this was not possible to => > achieve without breaking BSDI compatibility. => => Would it be feasable to have an option to switch between the two? = =Probably. I was just about to investigate this possibility. It should definitly be on automaticly if the memory configuration is not large, if you ask me... -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message