Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:05:47 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/i386/net htonl.S ntohl.S Message-ID: <20041023010547.GC20513@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <200410211557.23246.jhb@FreeBSD.org> References: <4175B591.4090407@elischer.org> <200410201553.40823.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20041021180809.GA36479@dragon.nuxi.com> <200410211557.23246.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 03:57:23PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > I waded though many arch@ archives but couldn't find where I had > brought this issue up. I did find one instance where it was discussed > prior to the SMPng commit back in April/May 2000 (old, yes) where cp@ > wanted to drop 386 and 486 support for 5, and the ideas there were to > allow for separate kernels. At this point, I guess I don't care/have > enough time to burn on this. I would think you of all people would > care about sticking to previously agreed to decisions though. I'm trying to. The problem is we don't seem to have a consensis on what the "previously agreed to decision" was. And we didn't formally document it. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041023010547.GC20513>