Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 23:50:13 -0700 From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> To: Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MFC'ing new md(4) functionality? Message-ID: <20010607065013.DADD93E32@bazooka.unixfreak.org> In-Reply-To: <200106070620.f576KUB05343@mass.dis.org>; from msmith@freebsd.org on "Wed, 06 Jun 2001 23:20:30 -0700"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org> writes: > > >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. > > > > Well, I see that we just ripped out the "wd" compat bits, so I guess > > we don't care about ABI/API stability that much in -stable any more... > > "We" being who? Your Danish henchman? 8) > > Actually, I do recall discussion over 'wd' being end-of-lifed in 4.x. I > suspect that it would make sense to EOL 'mfs' in a similar fashion. I > don't think there's a lot of good sense in pulling it out at an arbitrary > point, though, any more than there was in pulling 'wd' like it was. FWIW, this thread wasn't (originally) about EOL'ing mfs, but rather making the replacement of MFS (that being md(4)) available in -stable so that when MFS is finally EOL'd (which will be 5.0-REL at the latest), less people will cry. Dima Dorfman dima@unixfreak.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010607065013.DADD93E32>