From owner-freebsd-alpha Sat Jul 6 12:49:17 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1613337B400; Sat, 6 Jul 2002 12:49:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from canning.wemm.org (canning.wemm.org [192.203.228.65]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36A5643E31; Sat, 6 Jul 2002 12:49:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from fw.wemm.org (canning.wemm.org [192.203.228.65]) by canning.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92E2D2A7D6; Sat, 6 Jul 2002 12:49:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from overcee.wemm.org (overcee.wemm.org [10.0.0.3]) by fw.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 523BF4C242; Sat, 6 Jul 2002 12:49:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from wemm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4CDF3808; Sat, 6 Jul 2002 12:49:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Wilko Bulte Cc: "David O'Brien" , freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RFC: removing Turbochannel support for 5.0-current? In-Reply-To: <20020706161303.A77960@freebie.xs4all.nl> Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 12:49:10 -0700 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <20020706194910.C4CDF3808@overcee.wemm.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Wilko Bulte wrote: > On Sun, Jun 30, 2002 at 12:45:13PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 30, 2002 at 07:14:43PM +0200, Wilko Bulte wrote: > > > Given that Turbochannel support and support for the machines that have > > > TC buses has been left to rot AND the machines that have TC are > > > about as fast as 486s running current: > > > > > > how about removing TC support from -current and from -current only? > > > > I've got that commit ready to go... but maybe I should let Drew's reponce > > to this time out first. > > Apart from a diversion in this thread to discuss Multias/NoNames > (which have no TC so...) I think the consensus is to axe TC. > > David, would you do the honors, as you have prepared it already? Putting emotion aside for a moment, NetBSD seem to get a lot more joy out of keeping aging hardware up and running than we do. I would wager that come 5.0-R, NetBSD will run a lot more happily on such older hardware than FreeBSD will since 5.x is being developed on bigger/faster boxes. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message