Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 15:26:43 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GENERIC build broken Message-ID: <v04210102b4464a010c96@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <199911031917.MAA10150@mt.sri.com> References: <199911031844.LAA09963@mt.sri.com> <199911031857.KAA06668@dingo.cdrom.com> <199911031917.MAA10150@mt.sri.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 12:17 PM -0700 11/3/99, Nate Williams wrote: > > BOOTP in > > the kernel will go _when_there_is_an_acceptable_alternative_. > >You've already stated *THERE IS AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE*, and it's >PXE. (I can use all caps instead of underscores to make a point too :) I thought he was saying that "bootp in the kernel" should be removed at some point in the future. Not "all bootp" support, but just "inside-the-kernel hacks for bootp". I say let's cross the "remove bootp in the kernel" bridge when we actually come to it. --- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or drosih@rpi.edu Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?v04210102b4464a010c96>