From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 8 20:01:26 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0230516A41A for ; Sat, 8 Dec 2007 20:01:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@www.svzserv.kemerovo.su) Received: from www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (www.svzserv.kemerovo.su [213.184.65.80]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0734313C457 for ; Sat, 8 Dec 2007 20:01:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@www.svzserv.kemerovo.su) Received: from www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (eugen@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lB8K0h6s012267; Sun, 9 Dec 2007 03:00:43 +0700 (KRAT) (envelope-from eugen@www.svzserv.kemerovo.su) Received: (from eugen@localhost) by www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id lB8K0hKO012266; Sun, 9 Dec 2007 03:00:43 +0700 (KRAT) (envelope-from eugen) Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2007 03:00:43 +0700 From: Eugene Grosbein To: ????????? Bill Hacker Message-ID: <20071208200043.GA10998@svzserv.kemerovo.su> References: <20071208191310.GA5475@grosbein.pp.ru> <475AF350.1060100@conducive.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <475AF350.1060100@conducive.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: *Suspect* Re: SOLVED: qemu: freebsd6_mmap -1 errno 12 Cannot allocate memory X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2007 20:01:26 -0000 On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 07:41:04PM +0000, ????????? Bill Hacker wrote: > The ability to build from source and have access to source, is prized among > the experienced not so much because we fear hidden 'gotcha's from the > malicious or even proprietary vendor lock-in - but more for the ability to > *see* what breaks, rapidly locate and apply already-known fixes, or ask for > expert assistance when new ones are needed. Exactly. Both reasons are what we love open source for. > And in less time and lower cost than it takes the average bear to > acknowledge, find, and fix closed-source. Witness IBM, Sun, HP, Apple et al > adoption of a large measure of F/OSS. They can no longer afford to do > otherwise. Yes. > All that precisely because taking even limited advantage of progress makes > the delivery of binary backwards compatibility - much as we may want it and > strive for it - contrary to progress, and an impracticality in the real > world. I use FreeBSD quite a bit of time - since 2.2.5-RELEASE (when there was no /etc/rc.conf but /etc/sysconfig :-) My experience shows me that rebuilding what is not broken - that is what impractical. Binary compatibility in no way contraries the progress, it's always was and always will be Good Thing. We have to learn how to keep it even from Windows world. > Deal with that as best you can. ELSE revert to the last century and run > Windows. Thank you for suggestion. I run dual-boot FreeBSD/Windows system as my desktop for many years. Eugene Grosbein