Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:58:11 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: danny@cs.huji.ac.il Cc: keramida@linux.gr Subject: Re: src/UPDATING Message-ID: <20040823.125811.68307339.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20040823134827.A0D6A43D3F@mx1.FreeBSD.org> References: <keramida@linux.gr> <20040823134827.A0D6A43D3F@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <20040823134827.A0D6A43D3F@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> writes:
: > On 2004-08-23 16:21, Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> wrote:
: > > > On 2004-08-23 10:46, Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> wrote:
: > > > > shouldn't
: > > > > NOTE TO PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT FreeBSD 5.x IS SLOW:
: > > > > now be 6.x ...
: > > >
: > > > Would something like this seem ok to you? It only mentions FreeBSD-CURRENT
: > > > instead of a specific version, so it will also work for FreeBSD 7.X when
: > > > that comes along.
: > >
: > > fine, but what if FreeBSD 7.X is actually faster ... :-)
: >
: > The word "slower" refers to the reduced speed of a system that runs with
: > a lot of debugging/test options enabled. The relative speed of the
: > release to the previous is (probably) of lesser importance for this
: > particular quote.
: >
:
: i agree, it's that once you take out the 'milestone', it might just become
: superflous, on the other hand 5.x is bad, so just current is fine - one less
: thing to check for.
I believe that we won't have the debugging kernel options turned on by
default over the long haul. Once we're happy with the locking, they
will likely be turned off in GENERIC.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040823.125811.68307339.imp>