Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 03:09:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: RFC: remove xten from the base system? Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020613030718.43059A-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20020612234305.W2539-100000@master.gorean.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Doug Barton wrote: > 1. Some people actually use it. > 2. The code has kernel bits (thus it's hard to port, not sure how true > this is). > 3. It's easier to keep in synch if it's in the tree, since people will see > it get broken. The model used for Coda is to store the kernel module in the base tree, but keep the userland stuff in a port. This allows the kernel module to track changes in the base system kernel closely, removing that maintenance issue and keeping it in synch, but doesn't keep the stuff in the base system that doesn't really fit well. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Network Associates Laboratories 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?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020613030718.43059A-100000>