Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 15:09:14 -0700 From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: Arthur Mesh <arthurmesh@gmail.com>, secteam@freebsd.org, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: random(4) plugin infrastructure for mulitple RNG in a modular fashion Message-ID: <CAGE5yCq6A%2BUF9HrTv4-RvoOe1AhHk5FN71g=J=T9nQ%2BhWT1qcg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201308081023.53040.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20130807182858.GA79286@dragon.NUXI.org> <20130807192736.GA7099@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <CAGE5yCq%2Bs6kYtVYyxi27RAqPmvpV42nNNykm2%2B2x1EJGCihYXw@mail.gmail.com> <201308081023.53040.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 7:23 AM, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Wednesday, August 07, 2013 4:20:29 pm Peter Wemm wrote: [..] > The counter to this is that in the recent past, any suggestion to add anything > to DEFAULTS was met with "that's the wrong way". In actual fact, changes > to GENERIC happen quite often, and we often break older kernel configs from > older branches (ATA_CAM is no longer in 10 for example). I'm not sure I buy > the argument that we can never break kernel configs from older branches. I was talking about changes that break configs without detection. ATA_CAM is different. If the kernel fails to configure or compile, you fix it and repeat. The original patch meant your working kernel config built/installed without the slightest hint that something was wrong until it was a brick after boot. That's what I was taking issue with. -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; KI6FJV UTF-8: for when a ' just won\342\200\231t do. <brueffer> ZFS must be the bacon of file systems. "everything's better with ZFS"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGE5yCq6A%2BUF9HrTv4-RvoOe1AhHk5FN71g=J=T9nQ%2BhWT1qcg>