Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 12:41:17 +0100 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> Cc: mjacob@feral.com, Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com>, "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Causing known breakage (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_conf.c subr_disk.c) Message-ID: <33623.1004269277@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 28 Oct 2001 20:59:17 %2B1030." <20011028205917.C88146@monorchid.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20011028205917.C88146@monorchid.lemis.com>, Greg Lehey writes: >> We never had such a rule, and infrastructre changes would be close >> to impossible to perform if we did. > >That's a claim you continue to make. It makes life (or at least your >arguments) easier for you, but I disagree, and I'm not the only one. "We are many who think that..." >> Proof: Look at these messages from LINT: >> WARNING: COMPAT_SVR4 is broken and usage is, until fixed, not recommended >> #warning "The eni driver is broken and is not compiled with LINT" >> #warning "The fore pci driver is broken and is not compiled with LINT" >> #warning "The lmc driver is broken and is not compiled with LINT" >> >> This basically says that SCO/SVID compatibility, one entire ATM stack >> and a T1/E1 driver have been shot. > >Who did it? Can't remember, seem to recall it was related to newbus/PCI/interrupt or something in that area. If you want to implement this new rule of yours, I suggest you do so chronologically rather than to pick on me. >Have you evidence that it wasn't done because somebody made changes >without taking these issues into account? Currently this looks like >an argument for my point of view. If we carry on like this, >everything except the core functionality will be broken. Actually I think it is a neat thing. If nobody fixes these drivers before 5.0-R we can obviously remove them then because they are clearly NWOV[*] material in that case. >> Please don't invent new rules just because you are on core and you >> happen to have a grudge against somebody. > >Nothing I said here was with my core hat on, as nobody here will >doubt, yourself included. You're trying to distract attention from >the issues, which is rather below the belt. You know I don't have a >grudge against you. But, as should be obvious from this exchange, I >object to *anybody* who breaks things simply because he wants to >introduce something new and he's too lazy to fix all the issues which >need to be solved first. As somebody who so often ends up in the business-end of your claims and rule-making, it takes more than that to convince me. Poul-Henning [*] "Not Wanted On Voyage", mark put on luggage which could be put in the hold on trans-oceanic ships. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?33623.1004269277>