From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Feb 7 18:17: 3 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from xena.gsicomp.on.ca (cr677933-a.ktchnr1.on.wave.home.com [24.43.230.149]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 505B437B4EC for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 18:16:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (matt@localhost) by xena.gsicomp.on.ca (8.11.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f182Eoo42122; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 21:14:50 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from matt@xena.gsicomp.on.ca) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 21:14:50 -0500 (EST) From: Matthew Emmerton To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: Matthew Luckie , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: syscall kernel modules on 3.0-release In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 7 Feb 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Matthew Luckie writes: > > I completely understand your plea to not use 3.0 release. > > I am personally using 4.2-stable. Its not my decision to use 3.0 > > I beleive the computers running 3.0 have been running it for several years > > now - i.e. it was the latest available at the time. > > Well, it was a stupid decision at that time, and the decision not to > upgrade or replace these machines now is even stupider. Hey now, go easy. Lots of stupid decisions are made by "managers" who don't understand the implications of old(er) technology. I've got a 3.2-R machine which I'm forced to maintain, and the only reason why it's not running 3.2-S or 4.2-S is because I can't take the stupid thing offline. I've haggled with my boss for a 6 hour window and the answer is no, no, no. I've even got a 3.2-S installation waiting in /usr/obj. The only way I'm going to get my 3.2-R machine upgraded (and the only way this person is going to get their 3.0-R machine upgraded) is when it breaks and requires a complete reinstall to become operational. -- Matt Emmerton To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message