From owner-freebsd-current Sun Apr 18 16:38:44 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from janus.syracuse.net (janus.syracuse.net [205.232.47.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97D2D14CB3 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 16:38:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from green@unixhelp.org) Received: from localhost (green@localhost) by janus.syracuse.net (8.9.2/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA45222; Sun, 18 Apr 1999 19:36:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 19:36:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Brian Feldman X-Sender: green@janus.syracuse.net To: Alex Zepeda Cc: "Daniel C. Sobral" , "Jordan K. Hubbard" , current Subject: Re: newbus and modem(s) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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