From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Mar 2 11:44:39 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6EAE37B401 for ; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 11:44:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.208.78.105]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0840743FCB for ; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 11:44:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h22JiaSo036412; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 11:44:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.12.7/8.12.7/Submit) id h22JiZ7L036411; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 11:44:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 11:44:35 -0800 From: Steve Kargl To: Terry Lambert Cc: "Alan L. Cox" , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Removal of ENABLE_VFS_IOOPT Message-ID: <20030302194435.GA36383@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <3E619B26.DF1E4FC7@imimic.com> <3E624133.8FB21AA6@mindspring.com> <20030302185801.GA36138@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <3E625750.9319E291@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E625750.9319E291@mindspring.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 11:11:12AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > Steve Kargl wrote: > > > Here's an idea... ask John Dyson about it. > > > > From John's comments in c.u.b.f.m, I doubt he > > follows the kernel development in 5.0 close enough > > to make any recommendation without studying the > > code. I further suspect that John would not want > > to spend the time require. > > It's a design question, not an implementation question. Alan's > suggestion is that the design be modified because (in his opinion) > the implementation is incomplete. I suppose Alan's suggestion to remove the code is a modification to the design. :-) > BTW: I think you are wrong about John; I guess you missed his > post to -chat last week? I don't read -chat. I do read c.u.b.f.m and John's statements leads one to conclude he doesn't follow the development close enough to make a design decision. -- Steve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message