From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Jun 13 0: 9:38 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2456F37B476; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 00:09:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id g5D797b5043718; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 03:09:08 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 03:09:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Doug Barton Cc: "Jacques A. Vidrine" , freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: RFC: remove xten from the base system? In-Reply-To: <20020612234305.W2539-100000@master.gorean.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Doug Barton wrote: > 1. Some people actually use it. > 2. The code has kernel bits (thus it's hard to port, not sure how true > this is). > 3. It's easier to keep in synch if it's in the tree, since people will see > it get broken. The model used for Coda is to store the kernel module in the base tree, but keep the userland stuff in a port. This allows the kernel module to track changes in the base system kernel closely, removing that maintenance issue and keeping it in synch, but doesn't keep the stuff in the base system that doesn't really fit well. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Network Associates Laboratories To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message