From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jul 11 08:46:41 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA28113 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:46:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mole.mole.org (marmot.mole.org [204.216.57.191]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA28095 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:46:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mail@localhost) by mole.mole.org (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA14807; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 15:46:31 GMT Received: from meerkat.mole.org(206.197.192.110) by mole.mole.org via smap (V1.3) id sma014805; Thu Jul 11 15:46:27 1996 Received: (from mrm@localhost) by meerkat.mole.org (8.6.11/8.6.9) id IAA04439; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:46:26 -0700 Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:46:26 -0700 From: "M.R.Murphy" Message-Id: <199607111546.IAA04439@meerkat.mole.org> To: freebsd-hackers@freefall.freebsd.org, sextonr.crestvie@squared.com Subject: Re: Kernel Config (Was: GENERIC Kernel Debate) Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > I think we all ultimately want the all-singing, all-dancing loadable > kernel modules with PnP detection and auto config of devices while > simultaneously selecting proper drivers for compatible hardware while > working around all known incompatibilites. Not all of us do. At least one of us wants a really fast, really reliable system that makes extremely efficient use of its hardware environment. I suspect that that's not quite compatible with all-singing, all-dancing. Maybe, but I'm sceptical. I wouldn't be horribly unhappy with a SunOS 4.x-like system configuration procedure, but after once again getting used to a full-source configuration procedure, I think I'd miss the flexibility even more than the last time I had to live with SCO, ISC, or AT&T. -- Mike Murphy mrm@Mole.ORG +1 619 598 5874 Better is the enemy of Good