Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 19:36:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Brian Feldman <green@unixhelp.org> To: Alex Zepeda <garbanzo@hooked.net> Cc: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, current <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: newbus and modem(s) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9904181935060.45172-100000@janus.syracuse.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9904180949320.281-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 18 Apr 1999, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Apr 1999, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
>
> > I think CAM is a very bad example. We *still* don't have all the
> > drivers we had, and that includes at least one reasonably requested
> > driver.
>
> Is that an offer to write the missing drivers?
>
> > On the other hand, I don't see we losing anything with newbus, which
> > is quite a feat given the extent of the changes. Moreover, I have
> > seen very few problems reported. Changing the compiler to egcs seems
> > to have produced more waves, in fact.
>
> Plug and Play for at least the sio driver, perhaps just pnp in general for
> drivers that were moved to the newbus stuff.
>
> Is there any documentation explaining what exactly was changed?
>
> Sure, egcs created problems, but at least the general public was warned
> that this was going to be merged soon. But the kernel worked, and C
> programs worked usually.
>
> > > Well, why not make ext2fs the default fs just to shake things up? It's
> > > one thing to expect panics and soon, but it's another thing to import code
> > > that wasn't ready.
> >
> > It seems to work on my computer. Why do you say it isn't ready? A
> > reality check seems to be in order. It would seem you are peeved
> > because some of the very few gliches affected you.
>
> Why would I say it wasn't ready? Because outside of core (apparently),
> nobody was warned/told that this was going to be committed in a few
> days/hours/minutes.
>
> Glitches? What about the sbxvi driver? The apm driver? Sure, I'm
> annoyed about one of the glitches affecting me, but I just think if this
> code had been aired more publically before merging, all of these problems
> could have been easily avoided.
I saw this and just had to note something to you. THINK what branch you
are using. This is _WHERE_ things are being aired publically, and merged
eventually to the STABLE branch.
>
> And then what about newconfig? To me this just adds more truth to the
> whole /. argument that *BSD promotes a closed development model.
>
> - alex
>
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
>
Brian Feldman _ __ ___ ____ ___ ___ ___
green@unixhelp.org _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! _ __ | _ \ _ \ |) |
http://www.freebsd.org _ |___)___/___/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9904181935060.45172-100000>