From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jan 11 22:33:37 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 04B8A16A4CE; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 22:33:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 01BD143D55; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 22:33:35 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0C6XOOl022742;
	Mon, 12 Jan 2004 07:33:24 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=)
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 11 Jan 2004 22:35:28 +0100."
             <xzphdz2qicf.fsf@dwp.des.no> 
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 07:33:24 +0100
Message-ID: <22741.1073889204@critter.freebsd.dk>
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
cc: current@freebsd.org
cc: dgilbert@dclg.ca
Subject: Re: Future of RAIDFrame 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 06:33:37 -0000

In message <xzphdz2qicf.fsf@dwp.des.no>, Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=
 writes:
>"M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> writes:
>> Maybe this would be a good test-case for seeing how well it works?
>> Maybe not.  We do need to run a few more test-cases for things through
>> this scenario...  I'm not sure this one is well suited to it.
>
>If we toss out Vinum, there's a significant risk that 5.3 will ship
>without RAID support at all.  I'm pretty certain we don't want that.

If we don't do something drastic, there's a significant risk that
5.3 and all future releases will ship with partially broken RAID
support.  I'm pretty certain we don't want that either.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.