From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jul 11 08:35:57 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA25601 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:35:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from horst.bfd.com (horst.bfd.com [204.160.242.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA25570 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:35:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from harlie (bastion.bfd.com [204.160.242.2]) by horst.bfd.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA22069; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:34:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:34:47 -0700 (PDT) From: "Eric J. Schwertfeger" X-Sender: ejs@harlie To: David Greenman cc: Joe Greco , "Jordan K. Hubbard" , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Some recent changes to GENERIC In-Reply-To: <199607110449.VAA06047@root.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 10 Jul 1996, David Greenman wrote: > >> Ok, Joe, I'm going to put back sio2 and sio3 for you, OK? > > > >I don't appreciate your tone. > > (...lots of mutual bickering deleted) > > I think folks need to step back, calm down, take a deep breath, and put > this all into perspective. I'm sorry if I came across as demanding, know-it-all, etc. I do think removing sio2 and sio3 is a mistake. I don't think it's a big enough deal to get everyone all agrivated. If the probe for sio3 is causing problems, then we should find a way to avoid this problem. I don't know how widespread the problem is. I know it exists, but it hasn't affected any of my S3 based computers, and that's the only video chipset I use. It seems to me that the preference would be to 1) probe without invoking the problem (I don't know if we want to include special case detection to detect the problem video cards first). 2) disable the probe for sio3 only, in such a way that it can be reenabled with -c configuration. I thought someone had recently added this ability. Is the problem that this is only in -current? 3) disable sio3 and it's probe, but leave sio2 intact 4) disable sio2 and sio3 Of these, since I ranked them by preference, then obviously I think 1 would be best, since it's transparent to the user. 2 would be transparent to anyone who doesn't have a modem on sio3, and an RTFM to those that do. 3 would mean a kernel recompile in the case of a modem on sio3, and 4 would mean a kernel recompile on sio2 or sio3. As to the last two, a kernel recompile isn't a good answer if they want to install via PPP (maybe yet another boot image? Then we could call it RedHat FreeBSD :-) Also, I don't think we should be putting people in the position of having to recompile the kernel when at all possible. My first *nix machine ran on a 30Meg HD. Some of the machines I administer are running off of 80-120Meg hard drives, because they are only firewalls etc. Now, I've got several FreeBSD machines with pentiums and 1.6-2.8GB worth of fs that I can do a kernel recompile on, but that's just me (and just recently).