From owner-freebsd-questions Tue May 13 16:51:20 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA25515 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 13 May 1997 16:51:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rosie.scsn.net (scsn.net [206.25.246.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA25508 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 16:51:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cola68.scsn.net ([206.25.247.68]) by rosie.scsn.net (Post.Office MTA v3.0 release 0121 ID# 0-32322U5000L100S10000) with ESMTP id AAA162 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 19:44:35 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by cola68.scsn.net (8.8.5/8.6.12) id TAA01803; Tue, 13 May 1997 19:50:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <19970513195053.18174@cola68.scsn.net> Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 19:50:53 -0400 From: "Donald J. Maddox" To: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD 2.1.7 and COMPAT_43 References: <19970513180141.36385@cola68.scsn.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.69 In-Reply-To: ; from Richard Toren on Tue, May 13, 1997 at 07:30:18PM -0400 Reply-To: dmaddox@scsn.net Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, May 13, 1997 at 07:30:18PM -0400, Richard Toren wrote: > Have you never bought a new car? They invented the concept of the > "required option". I once worked for Ford Aerospace, and it was > always a joke that we needed a dedicated computer system to keep the > required options straight, and the customer confused.... But is that _our_ goal as well? Wouldn't it be better just to build required parts of the kernel unconditionally, and thereby avoid giving new users one more way to shoot themselves in the foot? -- Donald J. Maddox (dmaddox@scsn.net)