From owner-cvs-all Wed Mar 14 15:37:39 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from acampi.inet.it (acampi.inet.it [213.92.4.194]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4CC5B37B71A for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 15:37:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from andrea@webcom.it) Received: (qmail 2080 invoked from network); 15 Mar 2001 00:36:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO webcom.it) (212.239.10.243) by acampi.inet.it with SMTP; 15 Mar 2001 00:36:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 2560 invoked by uid 1000); 14 Mar 2001 23:34:04 -0000 Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 00:34:03 +0100 From: Andrea Campi To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: Tony Finch , Garrett Wollman , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Core's function (was: The Project and onward [was: Re: cvscommit: src/sys/netinet ip_output.c]) Message-ID: <20010315003403.C552@webcom.it> References: <3794.984471257@critter> <20010313104930.C60817@daemon.ninth-circle.org> <20010313133108S.jkh@osd.bsdi.com> <3AAEA353.B31800B5@originative.co.uk> <20010314104739.A50356@gurney.reilly.home> <20010314104739.A50356@gurney.reilly.home> <200103140142.UAA42549@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <20010314020407.Y412@hand.dotat.at> <20010315001732.B552@webcom.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from des@ofug.org on Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 12:33:06AM +0100 X-Echelon: BND CIA NSA Mossad KGB MI6 IRA detonator nuclear assault strike Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 12:33:06AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Andrea Campi writes: > > I'm trying to get more people in the company I work for, a BT subsidiary, to > > install and use FreeBSD. Problem is, the CTO is a great AIX fan, and is > > always touting the preemptive kernel of Mach based architectures. Anybody care > > to give me pointers, by private mail, on what arguments we have against that? > > We don't have any arguments against preemptive kernels. We think > they're a good idea. In fact, we think they're such a good idea that > we ("we" as in "Jason Evans, John Baldwin, Jake Burkholder and Bosko > Milekic, with a little help from some other people, including me") > are working our collective butts off making our kernel preemptive. The > -CURRENT kernel has been partially preemptive for the past month or > two. Yeah of course I know this, I'm not SO clueless :-p I meant to say: "in which way our implementation will be better than Mach/AIX, if it will? At least on par?" ;-) Seriously, I am fully aware of the direction we're going and on how much works you guys are putting into making this happen, and I'm very grateful to you all. Bye, Andrea -- Reboot America. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message