From owner-freebsd-current Wed May 12 14:21:35 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from tardis.perspectives.net (unknown [63.66.225.69]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4813A14CB4 for ; Wed, 12 May 1999 14:21:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jerry.alexandratos@perspectives.net) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=tardis.perspectives.net) by tardis.perspectives.net with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 10hgR0-000AyG-00; Wed, 12 May 1999 17:20:58 -0400 To: mi@aldan.algebra.com Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/pci pcisupport.c In-Reply-To: Message from Mikhail Teterin of "Wed, 12 May 1999 16:48:39 EDT." <199905122048.QAA72725@misha.cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <42168.926544057.1@tardis.perspectives.net> Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 17:20:57 -0400 From: Jerry Alexandratos Message-Id: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Mikhail Teterin says: : : Perhaps, the newbus vs. newconfig discussion can be summarized to both : sides' satisfaction offline and then presented to the rest of the world? But didn't this already happen. I seem to recall a round of discussions that went on a week before the new-bus switch. The entire discussion ran around in circles with both sides discussing the technical merits of their implementation and both sides pointing out the problems in the other's implementation. Check the archives for the all the messages. My personal opinion? Well, I've been looking at the newconfig stuff and I think that they weakened their cause by not following -current. I've been trying the stuff out since they announced. But it does me no good to try and use it if it's out of sync with userland. Hey, I don't feel like looking at "proc size mismatch" messages. 8) I think the real shame is that both sides have good ideas and a lot of the newconfig stuff could work with newbus. However, instead of pooling our resources we've divided them and drawn a line in the sand. And I can't say that I personally feel that all of the questioning e-mails that have been going around the past day make me any more sympathetic to the newconfig cause. Core made a decision. Let's follow it. And before anyone throws any of that "it's not traditional" stuff out, please remember that no other BSD is using a boot loader like ours, NetBSD dropped Mach-VM for UVM, etc, etc, etc... My real fear is that this causes a rift which will lead to a split like the Net/OpenBSD one. At that point, both sides lose. --Jerry name: Jerry Alexandratos || Open-Source software isn't a phone: 302.521.1018 || matter of life or death... email: jalexand@perspectives.net || ...It's much more important || than that! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message