From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Jun 6 19:41:14 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from bazooka.unixfreak.org (bazooka.unixfreak.org [63.198.170.138]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB07B37B405 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2001 19:41:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dima@unixfreak.org) Received: from hornet.unixfreak.org (hornet [63.198.170.140]) by bazooka.unixfreak.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5403A3E0B; Wed, 6 Jun 2001 19:41:10 -0700 (PDT) To: Poul-Henning Kamp Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MFC'ing new md(4) functionality? In-Reply-To: <70325.991758797@critter>; from phk@critter.freebsd.dk on "Tue, 05 Jun 2001 18:33:17 +0200" Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 19:41:10 -0700 From: Dima Dorfman Message-Id: <20010607024110.5403A3E0B@bazooka.unixfreak.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Poul-Henning Kamp writes: > In message <20010605013148.A49246@dragon.nuxi.com>, "David O'Brien" writes: > >On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 07:46:18PM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote: > >> Is there any reason not to MFC the new md(4) functionality > > > >Zero reason not to. > > Others see it differently, it would seriously break a lot of > people who are using -stable in embedded applications. > > If we have abandoned the "no changes to API or ABI in -stable" > paradigm, it would be a good idea, but it serious rains on that > rule... I don't think it would be much of a practical problem for anyone since the old behvior can be emulated with the new md pretty easily, but you're right that it isn't appropriate to break compatibility in -stable. It's probably possible to retrofit the old behavior into the new code, but I think that's too much evil for too little gain. Dima Dorfman dima@unixfreak.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message