From owner-freebsd-current Wed Dec 2 16:14:25 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA26734 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 16:14:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (ppp7.portal.net.au [202.12.71.107]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA26711 for ; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 16:14:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA00794; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 16:12:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199812030012.QAA00794@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Peter Jeremy cc: mike@smith.net.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sio breakage In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 02 Dec 1998 20:46:45 +1100." <98Dec2.204608est.40351@border.alcanet.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1998 16:12:11 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > If it does, this is clearly indicative of a > >need to move some of the server code into the kernel, > You mean, like GGI :-). No. Apart from the fact that GGI suffers from farcial mismanagement and a proven inability to design or ship code, as little as practical should move into the kernel. I don't think that this would be consistent with performance requirements however. 8( -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message