From owner-freebsd-current Sat Mar 9 13:58:38 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id NAA28443 for current-outgoing; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 13:58:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw.ast.com (fw.ast.com [165.164.6.25]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA28438 for ; Sat, 9 Mar 1996 13:58:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from nemesis by fw.ast.com with uucp (Smail3.1.29.1 #2) id m0tvWZo-00084lC; Sat, 9 Mar 96 15:53 CST Received: by nemesis.lonestar.org (Smail3.1.27.1 #20) id m0tvWLb-000C0YC; Sat, 9 Mar 96 15:38 WET Message-Id: Date: Sat, 9 Mar 96 15:38 WET To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: uhclem@nemesis.lonestar.org (Frank Durda IV) Sent: Sat Mar 9 1996, 15:38:42 CST Subject: Re: New kernel Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk [0]From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" [0]In former times we used the GENERIC keyword to do stuff like this, but [0]that was clearly gross. Stefan and I have tossed the idea around and [0]come up with the keyword FAILSAFE as a reasonable proposal. It sounds a bit like "Safe Mode" in Windows '95 but more intimidating. It is certainly more descriptive than GENERIC. It would be nice to avoid the use of the negative-sounding "FAIL" if possible... Frank Durda IV |"In skiing, there is this thing or uhclem%nemesis@rwsystr.nkn.net | called Reality. You will always | reach reality. The goal is to or ...letni!rwsys!nemesis!uhclem | avoid reaching it at a high rate of speed." (C) 1996 FDIV