From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jan  7 00:06:31 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27B0316A41B
	for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>; Mon,  7 Jan 2008 00:06:31 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg)
Received: from smtpgate1.pacific.net.sg (smtpgate1.pacific.net.sg
	[203.120.90.31])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 432DA13C469
	for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>; Mon,  7 Jan 2008 00:06:29 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg)
Received: (qmail 1624 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2008 23:39:47 -0000
Received: from adsl127.dyn229.pacific.net.sg (HELO P2120.somewherefaraway.com)
	(oceanare@210.24.229.127)
	by smtpgate1.pacific.net.sg with ESMTPA; 6 Jan 2008 23:39:47 -0000
Message-ID: <478166B3.5040901@pacific.net.sg>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 07:39:31 +0800
From: Erich Dollansky <oceanare@pacific.net.sg>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070826)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org>
References: <fll63b$j1c$1@ger.gmane.org>		<20080104163352.GA42835@lor.one-eyed-alien.net>		<9bbcef730801040958t36e48c9fjd0fbfabd49b08b97@mail.gmail.com>		<200801061051.26817.peter.schuller@infidyne.com>		<9bbcef730801060458k4bc9f2d6uc3f097d70e087b68@mail.gmail.com>		<4780D289.7020509@FreeBSD.org>	<flqmbo$eac$1@ger.gmane.org>		<4780E546.9050303@FreeBSD.org>	<9bbcef730801060651y489f1f9bw269d0968407dd8fb@mail.gmail.com>	<4780EF09.4090908@FreeBSD.org>	<flr0ie$euj$1@ger.gmane.org>	<47810BE3.4080601@FreeBSD.org>	<4781227B.5020800@rcn.com>
	<47814EAB.70405@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <47814EAB.70405@FreeBSD.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>,
	Gary Corcoran <gcorcoran@rcn.com>, Ivan Voras <ivoras@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: Should we simply disallow ZFS on FreeBSD/i386?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 00:06:31 -0000

Hi,

Maxim Sobolev wrote:
> Gary Corcoran wrote:
> 
> I believe that 95% of hardware today that realistically is capable of 

I do not think so.

> running ZFS is also capable of running 64bit code, so that potential ZFS 

All new hardware since Intel started supporting 64 bits on their 
Pentiums is.

> limitations of already dying i386. And we are as a project are better 

Let's see it much more practical. Are all features and all ports all the 
time supported on all platforms?

I do not think so.

So, just make it a requirement for ZFS to run only on 64 bit upward.

It is not that FreeBSD does not have some kind o file system for older 
machines.

Erich