Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 19:41:10 -0700 From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MFC'ing new md(4) functionality? Message-ID: <20010607024110.5403A3E0B@bazooka.unixfreak.org> In-Reply-To: <70325.991758797@critter>; from phk@critter.freebsd.dk on "Tue, 05 Jun 2001 18:33:17 %2B0200"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> writes: > In message <20010605013148.A49246@dragon.nuxi.com>, "David O'Brien" writes: > >On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 07:46:18PM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote: > >> Is there any reason not to MFC the new md(4) functionality > > > >Zero reason not to. > > Others see it differently, it would seriously break a lot of > people who are using -stable in embedded applications. > > If we have abandoned the "no changes to API or ABI in -stable" > paradigm, it would be a good idea, but it serious rains on that > rule... I don't think it would be much of a practical problem for anyone since the old behvior can be emulated with the new md pretty easily, but you're right that it isn't appropriate to break compatibility in -stable. It's probably possible to retrofit the old behavior into the new code, but I think that's too much evil for too little gain. Dima Dorfman dima@unixfreak.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010607024110.5403A3E0B>