Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 08:44:05 -0700 (PDT) From: "Eric J. Schwertfeger" <ejs@bfd.com> To: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" <michaelv@HeadCandy.com> Cc: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Some recent changes to GENERIC Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.94.960711083615.21744C-100000@harlie> In-Reply-To: <199607110506.WAA02216@MindBender.HeadCandy.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 10 Jul 1996, Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com wrote: > that big a deal? I've heard lots of hyptheticals so far, but I > haven't heard anyone yet say "*MY* machine will break if you take > these ports out." It will mean a kernel recompile on 3 of the 4 FreeBSD machines that I administrate, and in one of those cases, the modem in question is the only link to the outside world (including where I would be installing from) so I'd have to install on one of the other machines, create a kernel for the one remote machine, then figure out how to use that kernel on an install disk. This is not something a new user to FreeBSD should have to worry about. Of course, I probably shouldn't be running GENERIC on those machines, so this wouldn't be an entirely bad thing. I think the reason I'm so touchy on this is because people are talking about disabling both sio2 and sio3. If only sio3 is disabled, this becomes a moot point on all 4 machines. If I ever need 4 sio ports, I'll probably go with something other than a stock serial port.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSI.3.94.960711083615.21744C-100000>