From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Mar 14 9:46:30 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from peach.ocn.ne.jp (peach.ocn.ne.jp [210.145.254.87]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63A8314F9D for ; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 09:46:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dcs@newsguy.com) Received: from newsguy.com by peach.ocn.ne.jp (8.9.1a/OCN) id CAA13296; Mon, 15 Mar 1999 02:45:54 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <36EBF581.FE962C9D@newsguy.com> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 02:44:33 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: pt-BR,ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sheldon Hearn , hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Proposal: Define MAXMEM in GENERIC References: <63209.921431112@axl.noc.iafrica.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > This was the argument I raised in my original mail. However, it looks Sorry, I missed it... :-( > Anyway, I'm loath for this to turn into an unproductive flame war, so > I won't try to argue an opinion I've already put forward. Instead, I > ask whether there's any other solution you can think of, since we're > likely to see more and more people having problems related to failed > speculative memory probes as >64MB machines become entry-level. As >64Mb machines become entry level, I expect them to start to get their acts together. It's not only FreeBSD that has trouble with troubled hardware, and it will bite the makers otherwise. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org "What happened?" "It moved, sir!" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message