From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Dec 11 00:58:41 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id AAA21174
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 11 Dec 1997 00:58:41 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA21169
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 11 Dec 1997 00:58:36 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.7/8.6.9) with ESMTP id AAA25638; Thu, 11 Dec 1997 00:58:28 -0800 (PST)
To: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
cc: "J. Weatherbee - Senior Systems Architect" <jamil@acroal.com>,
        FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject: Re: OS Ports 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 11 Dec 1997 14:54:58 +0900."
             <Pine.SV4.3.95.971211144909.13562A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> 
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 1997 00:58:28 -0800
Message-ID: <25634.881830708@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> What you suggested was pretty masochistic.  You really want to be closer
> to where your going than where you are now.  Also, you don't want to
> destablise stable! 

That latter point is also one I should have made.  Doing it in -stable
would, of course, mean that the Sun support would *never* get merged
into FreeBSD since that would be antiethical to the purpose of
-stable.  We don't even bring things like x86 SMP support across from
3.0 to 2.2 (and never will), you think we're going to totally break
character and plop an entirely different architecture into it? :-)
No.

					Jordan