From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Jul 9 16:47:47 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mail-relay.eunet.no (mail-relay.eunet.no [193.71.71.242]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D337D37B92F for ; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 16:47:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from login-1.eunet.no (login-1.eunet.no [193.75.110.2]) by mail-relay.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.9.3/GN) with ESMTP id BAA86630; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 01:47:43 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from localhost (mbendiks@localhost) by login-1.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA88619; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 01:47:43 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) X-Authentication-Warning: login-1.eunet.no: mbendiks owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 01:47:43 +0200 (CEST) From: Marius Bendiksen To: Adam Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp , "Daniel C. Sobral" , Alfred Perlstein , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: making the snoop device loadable. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I dont like kernel changes that make the kernel do less babysitting and me > more. Tough, I guess. I believe it is general consensus that Unix should be a tool to be used or abused as the end-user sees fit, to the extent that the admin fails to do such babysitting himself, and that it is Unix' task to avoid babysitting to whatever extent is possible. Marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message