Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 08:47:31 -0500 From: Matthew Reimer <mreimer@vpop.net> To: Murray Stokely <murray@freebsdmall.com> Cc: firewire@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MFC? Message-ID: <3DB010F3.90005@vpop.net> References: <3DAEDEB8.1040502@vpop.net> <20021017230742.K27351@freebsdmall.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Murray Stokely wrote: > On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 11:00:56AM -0500, Matthew Reimer wrote: > >>Now that -stable is unfrozen, can the firewire driver be MFC'd? > > 5.0-RELEASE will be the next official version of FreeBSD -- it's not > clear that this major new feature needs to be MFCed. I presume it > hooks in with many different parts of the kernel and may be > non-trivial to MFC. It hasn't been in -CURRENT very long yet anyway, > and would need more testing time regardless. > > - Murray I agree that firewire doesn't *need* to be MFCed, but doesn't -stable policy allow low-impact new features to be MFCed? The firewire patches at http://people.freebsd.org/~simokawa/ which were committed to -current have worked for a long time with both 4.x and 5.x, and only add new files in /sys/dev/firewire, touching nothing else. These patches look as trivial to MFC as possible (granting that firewire in -current has been tweaked a little since it was imported). Does that affect the possibility of an MFC? Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-firewire" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3DB010F3.90005>