Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 13:21:06 -0600 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: mjacob@feral.com Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, Warner Losh <imp@village.org>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Racing interrupts Message-ID: <199910251921.NAA14719@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9910251215480.27785-100000@semuta.feral.com> References: <199910251915.NAA14613@mt.sri.com> <Pine.BSF.4.05.9910251215480.27785-100000@semuta.feral.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Feh. Okay, maybe a cheapshot. Sorry. But the argument "Things are just > fine the way they are and users will cope" pushes my buttons a bit... I didn't agree that 'things are just fine the way they are', I simply stated that too often the standard approach to the problem is to state 'your hardware is broken, fix it'. I don't like this stand (although have used it myself on many occasions), but I suspect it will be the solution that is found, given the lack of resources. Are you willing to spend the time to design/develop a working error handling system for FreeBSD? Standing on the sidelines and stating that it's broken w/out spending any resources to make it better is a bigger crime in my opinion than not having the system in the first place.... Nate > > > On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Nate Williams wrote: > > > > > It's alot easier to use the standard FreeBSD approach to the problem. > > > > "You've got broken hardware, fix it and FreeBSD will work better." :( > > > > > > Then FreeBSD will never be a serious server solution, and I for one would > > > quit wasting my time on a Linux wannabe. > > > > Linux wannabe? Cheap shot, and completely uncalled for, especially > > since Linux is no better at this than FreeBSD, and often-times *MUCH* > > worse. > > > > > > > > Nate > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199910251921.NAA14719>