Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:21:50 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/ata ata-queue.c Message-ID: <20050518182150.lcak29sfts0ssgws@netchild.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20050518.074805.26964549.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20050517180454.brq1tjzo2s88g8ow@netchild.homeip.net> <20050517.123715.74710629.imp@bsdimp.com> <20050518103544.18i8c5w3ok8oscgw@netchild.homeip.net> <20050518.074805.26964549.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > In message: <20050518103544.18i8c5w3ok8oscgw@netchild.homeip.net> > Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> writes: > : Users of -current are supposed to read current@. And they are supposed to > : /usr/src/UPDATING. Major changes to binutils at least provoke a HEADS-UP > : message in current@ (at least they did in the past). And major changes to > : config result in a message about mismatching versions if you run an old > : config binary. > > In the past we took this attitude. However, there were *SO* many > questions about why the build was broken that we introduced > buildkernel/installkernel. Once we did that, the number of questions > dropped to almost zero. Since I used to answer a bunch of them, and I > started UPDATING to help with the FAQ, I can tell you we're running at > about 10% the previous layers. It is a safe way to build the kernel > that always works. And we've also seen the ability for more people in > the user community to answer other people's questions. It really has > been a big win. I don't want to say the opposite, I just object to shout everyone down when he talks about the classic way (I'm exaggerating a litte bit...). > : Changes to other subsystems which make the old or new userland incompatible > : with the new or old kernel are typically announced too. > > Typically? Hardly. Sometimes, yes. But not all the time. It also > varies with time. Some months are good, some are bad. Overall we're pretty good... > : This is like "the telnet problem". Alot of people yell at you that you have > : to use ssh and telnet is evil. But telnet is an useful tool and there are > : situations where it is ok to use telnet because it can't hurt you in those > : situations. I generally object to badmouthing tools in every > situation, when > : there are valid uses for this tool. I favour teaching the people > where it is > : ok and where it isn't ok to use such tools, and I show allergic reactions > : when someone exhibits this "everything is evil" behavior. I hope this lets > : you understand why I "promote" the old behavior here. > > This is a non-sequitor. The new kernel targets produced real, > tangable results. If you want to use the old ways, feel free. Just > don't complain when they break, which they do with far too frequency. I don't complain when they break. And AFAIR I've never complained when they did. But I complain if someone knows how to use it and everyone cries when he shows it to others. The discussion started with des saying something like "the classic way is bad, don't do this" while it would have been enough to say "and with the new procedure it looks like". I don't want to pick on des here, everyone can have a bad day. But he isn't the only one, in the past I've seen alot of people pointing their gun at someone who uses the classic way and pulling the trigger, and I don't think this is OK. Let's shut up now and maybe put a sentence or two about KODIR and nextboot into the updating description. Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137 But soft you, the fair Ophelia: Ope not thy ponderous and marble jaws, But get thee to a nunnery -- go! -- Mark "The Bard" Twain
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050518182150.lcak29sfts0ssgws>