Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 11 Jul 1996 22:42:43 -0700 (MST)
From:      Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
To:        michaelv@HeadCandy.com (Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com)
Cc:        terry@lambert.org, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, jkh@time.cdrom.com
Subject:   Re: Some recent changes to GENERIC
Message-ID:  <199607120542.WAA00642@phaeton.artisoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <199607110450.VAA01629@MindBender.HeadCandy.com> from "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" at Jul 10, 96 09:50:14 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> Maybe I have a bad attitude, but...  This is Unix.  If they can't or
> >> don't want to build their own kernel, they should be running Windows
> >> or OS/2.
> 
> Terry writes:
> >This is Unix, the most sophisticated OS available.  It should support
> >use of fallback drivers and dynamic loading of replacement devices
> >as needed, so if they can't or won't build their own kernel, it will
> >have no effect on their ability to run the system, one way or another.
> 
> Well, yeah, that's a great goal.  But, how do we solve the ATI/S3/com4
> conflict and kernel bloat with the source base that exists _right_
> _now_ in 2.1.5 (and/or NetBSD 1.2)?  Better ideas?

You punt for 2.1.5.

I pointed at the ATI code to let someone integrate a patch "unsullied
by Terry's grandiose ideas", which would have creeped in had I done a
patch, and which seems to be a sticking point for many for a lot of
patches.

You can't hit a target if you never aim at it.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607120542.WAA00642>