From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 20 09:29:27 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7219D37B401; Tue, 20 May 2003 09:29:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (trang.nuxi.com [66.93.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A98A543F85; Tue, 20 May 2003 09:29:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h4KGTMA9068705; Tue, 20 May 2003 09:29:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h4KGTMBq068704; Tue, 20 May 2003 09:29:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 09:29:22 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" To: Ruslan Ermilov Message-ID: <20030520162922.GB68325@dragon.nuxi.com> Mail-Followup-To: David O'Brien , Ruslan Ermilov , current@FreeBSD.org References: <20030519024518.05B402A7EA@canning.wemm.org> <20030519061401.GB40604@sunbay.com> <20030519192119.GA4267@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030519193120.GB79469@sunbay.com> <20030519221106.GA17226@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030520044418.GA34212@sunbay.com> <20030520083421.GB22249@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030520084052.GA60294@sunbay.com> <20030520084749.GA22687@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030520093423.GA62969@sunbay.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030520093423.GA62969@sunbay.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT Organization: The NUXI BSD Group X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5 cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Do we want to split release.9 into MD parts now or not? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: current@FreeBSD.org List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 16:29:27 -0000 On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 12:34:23PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > [Reattaching current@ as this turns out to be a normal discussion.] Err, Why?? You seem to want to turn this into a bikeshed. Thing like this should be coordinated, designed, and prototyped by a small group of people and then presented. I'm not going to get into a long winded thread with you on this in this forum. > >>> .if ${TARGET_ARCH} == "alpha" && !defined(NO_FLOPPIES) > > A bandaid for Alpha kern.flp being low on space (kgzip(1) > support would fix that). You seem to be the only one strongly arguing for boot floppies on Alpha, and you don't even own one [yet]. I guess they provide a fun challenge for you, but the rest of us that do release builds have come to totally hate them. > >>> .elif ${TARGET_ARCH} == "ia64" > > ia64 provides the EFI boot loader; there are rumors that > for newer ia32 machines this could also be made a case. Won't be for Athlon PC's. > Overall, I think that having 9 architecture ifdefs for You forgot the whole small, and if this exists and that exists, and then do foo. The makefile is a mess. We've been in-line ".ifdef" special casing everything related to the floppies and CDROM boot image for too long. We would never tolerate that in our C code. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)