From owner-freebsd-current Fri Jul 21 05:47:23 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id FAA26988 for current-outgoing; Fri, 21 Jul 1995 05:47:23 -0700 Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id FAA26971 ; Fri, 21 Jul 1995 05:47:18 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id FAA27081; Fri, 21 Jul 1995 05:46:39 -0700 To: Karl Denninger cc: rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com (Rodney W. Grimes), karl@mcs.com, current@freebsd.org, peter@haywire.DIALix.COM, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SUP target for -STABLE, and setup for SUP info? In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 20 Jul 1995 22:48:26 CDT." <199507210348.WAA00203@Jupiter.mcs.net> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 05:46:39 -0700 Message-ID: <27079.806330799@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: current-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > I guess that -STABLE isn't. Well, perhaps we were overly optimistic with the naming; I think "stabilizing" is a better description since we're obviously not really going to be happy with its stability until we've reached the point where 2.1 can be released, and that's still a month or two away. A lot can happen in that time. > I get the same silent hang on the 1742 machine that I get on the other > releases, and we've added a panic in biodone to the mix. The 2742 driver > problems are not addressed in -STABLE either. We needed to shake this out in -current a little longer before bringing it across. I'll ask Justin what his plans for this code are. > This is getting frustrating, and I'm running out of time and patience. > Perhaps this isn't the path we want to go down with our operating system > choice. > > I'm going to give this another week of effort, and if we don't have it > stable by then I'm tossing in the towel and going to start on the evaluation > process again from scratch. This is costing me far too much sleep. I understand. Please do also understand that we are doing everything we can to work with you on this and don't have many people who are actually paid to do this kind of work. Progress is therefore constrained by whatever free time the members have to devote to it. If do we manage to get these problems worked out for you before you pull the ejection handle, perhaps it's time to think about moving FreeBSD Inc's support-for-money plans forward. If I could afford to hire just ONE serious systems hacker to look into problems like this full-time, it would be a significant help. We just need to figure out how willing the various commercial users like yourself are to to underwrite such an effort. This also isn't an attempt on my part to put the screws to anyone, this is simply an honest assessment of our current state affairs. I would love to be able to throw someone at your problem full-time, but that's a luxury I don't really have with a volunteer crew, nor can I expect people to jump at the crack of a whip. This is problem that isn't going to go away and will, in fact, only get worse as more commercial interests move to FreeBSD. I would welcome your (or anyone else's) suggestions. Jordan