Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 07:25:45 -0800 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: "Bruce M. Walter" <walter@fortean.com> Cc: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Powering off the system/UPS Message-ID: <199802071525.HAA00877@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 06 Feb 1998 10:20:27 EST." <Pine.BSF.3.95q.980206095913.22500A-100000@callisto.fortean.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I've been hashing this out with Mike Smith, and he feels that > > a) the at_shutdown queues should be ordered to insure their being called > in the right order -and- I am actually inclined to agree that sorting these is Too Hard, and not really worthwhile. A new list is really all that's needed. What I want is a judgement call on this today/tomorrow: - Should I add this third list to -stable before 2.2.6 goes into BETA? I realise that this is not the same as adding the driver(s) you're working on, but there are tools for adding drivers (eg. src/tools/kdrv/) to the kernel easily, as long as the infrastructure they depend on is there. At this juncture, I would *not* be modifying APM to use this list in -stable. I would be happy to do that in -current though. -- \\ 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. \\
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199802071525.HAA00877>