From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Nov 12 08:05:57 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id IAA13507 for chat-outgoing; Wed, 12 Nov 1997 08:05:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat) Received: from schenectady.netmonger.net (schenectady.netmonger.net [209.54.21.143]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA13500 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 1997 08:05:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from postmaster@schenectady.netmonger.net) Received: (from news@localhost) by schenectady.netmonger.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA11006 for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Wed, 12 Nov 1997 10:37:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from GATEWAY by schenectady.netmonger.net with netnews for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org (freebsd-chat@freebsd.org) To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Date: 12 Nov 1997 15:36:59 GMT From: chris@netmonger.net (Christopher Masto) Message-ID: <64cier$a60$1@schenectady.netmonger.net> Organization: NetMonger Communications Subject: Pentium bug (really) Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I either joined this mailing list too late or joined the wrong mailing lists. Since I'm in charge of an ISP that provides shell accounts, I am on the brink of making a rather important decision. I am pretty sick of Intel, so replacing our P166s with K6s is somewhat attractive. Still, BSDI claims that Intel has helped them to develop a workaround (which they're not at liberty to explain in detail). Even if Intel isn't being cooperative with the free software community, it is plausible that "a workaround exists" implies "someone will find it and publish it". Of course, this is all moot if I missed the announcement that FreeBSD already has the same fix. Anyway, the big question is.. does it or might it in the near future? -- = Christopher Masto = chris@netmonger.net = http://www.netmonger.net/ = = NetMonger Communications = finger for PGP key = $19.95/mo unlimited access = = Director of Operations = (516) 221-6664 = mailto:info@netmonger.net =