From owner-freebsd-stable  Thu Nov 21  7:36:16 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 841A637B425; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 07:36:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail2.qc.uunet.ca (mail2.qc.uunet.ca [198.168.54.17])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id CD4B343E4A; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 07:36:09 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from anarcat@espresso-com.com)
Received: from xtanbul.studio.espresso-com.com ([216.94.147.57])
	by mail2.qc.uunet.ca (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA26782;
	Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:35:42 -0500
Received: from anarcat by xtanbul.studio.espresso-com.com with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 18EtMS-0003Mo-00; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:35:24 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:35:23 -0500
From: The Anarcat <anarcat@anarcat.ath.cx>
To: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de>
Cc: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>,
	Matthias Andree <ma@dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de>, ports@freebsd.org,
	stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: HEADSUP - change in CDRIOC.*SPEED ioctl units
Message-ID: <20021121153523.GA12403@xtanbul.studio.espresso-com.com>
References: <m3fztvy0p0.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211202139460.66175-100000@root.org> <20021121111557.GC6603@merlin.emma.line.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20021121111557.GC6603@merlin.emma.line.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-stable.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-stable>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-stable>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Thu Nov 21, 2002 at 12:15:57PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Nate Lawson wrote:
> 
> > I'm not going to debate API since as I said before, the API is
> > fundamentally limiting.  It was written to support one program
> > (burncd) and thus is overly restrictive.  I took the approach of limiting
> > the MMC set less, not adding another hack.
> 
> If it's really only used by baseline programs, would not it be better
> then to kill it altogether than shuffling it from one limited state to
> another? Some people say that software optimization is complete when
> there's nothing left to remove. I tend to agree for the maintenance
> involved.

Well, one could potentially say that this is what -current is for, API
breakage/corrections.

But I don't oppose the move, on the contrary. I agree with the
correction since the only consumers of the API are the base tools. (do
we have confirmation on that?)

A.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message