Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 14:42:15 -0600 (MDT) From: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> To: Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@freebsd.org> Cc: bugghy <bugghy@home.ro> Subject: Re: magic sysrq keys functionality Message-ID: <20040726143916.X32601@pooker.samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <20040726191004.GC96815@green.homeunix.org> References: <1090718450.2020.4.camel@illusion.com> <200407251112.46183.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20040726152151.GC1473@green.homeunix.org> <20040726175219.GA96815@green.homeunix.org> <20040726181821.GB96815@green.homeunix.org> <20040726191004.GC96815@green.homeunix.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote: > On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 12:54:39PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > > On Mon, 26 Jul 2004, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote: > > > I think it would be prudent to add a nice fat "WARNING:" printf to the > > > boot process. It's really not obvious that FreeBSD defaults to having > > > your hard drives run "unsafely," even though it is usually faster. > > > > > > > I think that this was discussed too. The problem is that Linux and > > Windows also silently default to having it on, and breaking from that > > status quo causes too much haertburn. > > The status quo of FreeBSD and Linux shouldn't really apply to FreeBSD... > we're supposed to be about stability and correctness. > Whoa there. What part of 'biblically bad things happen when you change this' did you not understand? Go look in the email archives to see the previous discussion. In short, I agree that it's not ideal, but I don't agree that your assertion that it must be changed. Not everything is black and white here. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040726143916.X32601>