Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 23:22:59 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: juli mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/boot/i386/boot0 boot0ext.s src/sys/boot/i386/boot0ext Makefile Message-ID: <20040327072259.GA85580@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20040327071459.GA98009@FreeBSD.org> References: <200403261846.i2QIkVuT063179@repoman.freebsd.org> <200403261706.46836.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20040326223518.GA78950@dragon.nuxi.com> <4064ED3E.4000407@freebsd.org> <20040327063641.GA85117@dragon.nuxi.com> <20040327071459.GA98009@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 09:14:59PM -1000, juli mallett wrote: > > > >>This has a bug that I've fixed in a p4 branch. You could have > > > >>found that out if you had asked me first. > > > > > > > >I plan to commit what you have from p4. But I wanted this to be an > > > >exact copy of rev 1.22, so that if we can agree to go with the 2-sector > > > >boot0 for 6.0, it would be easier to see the changes. > > > > > > > >Please feel free to commit what you have in perforce, since it will be a > > > >little bit until I can. > > > > > > Since you seem to be concerned about preserving history, could bringing > > > this file back have been done as a repo-copy? > > > > Not as you might expect. I expect for 6.0, that 'boot0.s' will be the > > 2-sector one. Thus there will a diversion fork, I can't think of a way > > around it. But I'm trying to make it as easy to follow as possible. > > If this is JHB's thing, and he's got it in P4, wouldn't it be > better to let him take the lead and coordinate this than doing it > in some way you find convenient? Sorry, but I'd like to have a useful boot0 -- one that tells me my partition is something other than "???". That can't be done with a 1-sector boot0. No one complained when boot0sio.s was added, I don't see why boot0ext.s is becoming a federal case. Geez. I figured people would have greatly preferred how I did this vs. making boot0.s the 2-sector version. As far as I can tell, boot0 isn't at the top of JHB interest list right now. I personally have to tripple boot a laptop daily, so it is a large interest of mine. I also know of another committer who expressed interest in folding boot0sio.s into boot0ext.s so that we could 'cvs rm' boot0sio.s. > I'm not sure that having 3 places where the history of this file will > be is appealing, especially if you are making this fork in CVS for > purely an ephemeral manner. I do not find that a very attractive > solution. Perforce history does not exist. It is not the official project SCM. Things done in perforce are the same as things done on a committers private hard disk. Extracting things out of perforce is also a PITA. Again, things don't exist for the project unless they are in CVS. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040327072259.GA85580>