From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 5 01:33:30 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A19461065693 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 01:33:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from skip@menantico.com) Received: from vms173013pub.verizon.net (vms173013pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 819358FC1F for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2010 01:33:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx.menantico.com ([71.168.206.243]) by vms173013.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPA id <0KVR00IPV0763RJ6@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net>; Mon, 04 Jan 2010 18:33:11 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 19:40:30 -0500 From: Skip Ford To: "M. Warner Losh" Message-id: <20100105004030.GA1175@menantico.com> References: <201001042130.o04LU4ln085140@svn.freebsd.org> <20100104.144005.262629641795617719.imp@bsdimp.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline In-reply-to: <20100104.144005.262629641795617719.imp@bsdimp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org, dougb@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r201534 - in head/sys: amd64/conf arm/conf i386/conf ia64/conf mips/conf pc98/conf powerpc/conf sparc64/conf sun4v/conf X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 01:33:30 -0000 M. Warner Losh wrote: > I'm sorry that I didn't notice this sooner and comment upon it. It is > a really bad idea for a lot of reasons.. > > The DEFAULTS file is not for optional items. It is only for items > that are required for all (or almost all) users of the system to build > a working kernel. Including the config file isn't anywhere near > required. In addition, changing it on a stable branch seems like a > big default change. Finally, we're planning on deprecating this file > entirely in the future, so no further changes should be made to it > without discussion. > > I've reverted this after chatting on IRC with bz@ and ed@. > > I'm posting this to arch@ so that the followup discussion can take > place. *IF* there is wide-spread consensus to add it back, I'll take > care of that leg work (as well as anything I've overlooked in the > back out). But I don't think there's wide-spread support for this in > DEFAULTS... In Doug's defense, I saw the discussion about it, and most who replied convinced him to do what he did. I don't think anyone, including me, spoke up to say what you say above, most likely because somebody would've just called the discussion a bikeshed, then grabbed their toys and gone home. IMO, there's just not much discussion or code review these days due to testy messages and development happening in non-public repositories, and that's what bit Doug. His original plan was fine. Thanks for taking your time to clean it up. And it's good to hear it's deprecated since this isn't the first time a widely-used or just very useful kernel option had to be backed out of the DEFAULTS file. -- Skip