Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 20:14:28 +0100 From: Ceri Davies <ceri@submonkey.net> To: "Michael W. Lucas" <mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org> Cc: doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Questions to kill in FAQ Message-ID: <68df7addf10e62daeb38b4d2bd2440e7@submonkey.net> In-Reply-To: <20050512185934.GA75352@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> References: <20050512185934.GA75352@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 12 May 2005, at 19:59, Michael W. Lucas wrote: > 3.16 -- I believe that the 1024 limit no longer exists on modern > FreeBSD? Like the questions says, I was under the impression that this was a BIOS problem, so it's probably not going away. > 5.2 -- So, some model of EISA SCSI card has trouble on some model of > HP Netserver. This has been in the FAQ for many years, and I > suspect it is now irrelevant. It is already useless, because we have > no idea what model this would be. :-) I think it should go. Any of these still in production are either already running FreeBSD or something else, and only still exist because they can't be touched. > 5.9 -- NLAF? Pass. It's been a long time since I've worried about this though. > 6.1 -- FreeBSD Mall doesn't seem to offer the mentioned "Desktop > Edition." (I could lean forward and ask Murray, but Robert is > talking at the moment and that would be rude.) Did he shut up yet? ;^) > 6.2,6.4 -- Metrolink seems to be gone, and XiG doesn't appear to > support FreeBSD We don't support a.out in current any more anyway (or did I dream that?); get rid. > 6.3 -- The answer seems to be "sorry, no longer available." Thankfully. > 9.3 -- NLAF? Now *this* one I do think is due to the fact that it is in the FAQ. > 9.4 -- NLAF? Ditto. > 16.8 -- NLAF? Can go. > 18.15 -- NLAF? Pass. > 18.16 -- If we're axing 3.X in the FAQ, this whole Q&A needs > rewriting. I could make a stab at it from a pure grammar/math > perspective, but would prefer some input > from someone who actually works on the code. :-) It needs rewriting anyway, as PAE changes the maximum again (and it's almost certainly different on !i386 too). I'd just get rid of it; we can resurrect it and worry about it later if it ever gets A again. Also, there is a "Any other information on this subject would be appreciated." sticking out like a sort thumb in 9.7 which can go (or moved to an XXX comment at least). Cheers, Ceri -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin) iD8DBQFChPyaocfcwTS3JF8RAggkAJ9jZEpmFu6WnVpORgqGsL35pOaX8gCfd1bI 46inu/Je3rs5x/T7m9YMp8I= =7Afw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?68df7addf10e62daeb38b4d2bd2440e7>