Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 04 Feb 2008 22:01:42 +0100
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
To:        gregoryd.freebsd@free.fr
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, d@delphij.net
Subject:   Re: SCHED_ULE trouble after ugrade 6.2-RELEASE -> 6.3-RELEASE
Message-ID:  <47A77D36.6040102@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <1202158167.47a77a572701f@imp.free.fr>
References:  <47A6D272.2000406@gmail.com> <47A6D420.5050700@delphij.net>	<1202156029.47a771fda5d1c@imp.free.fr>	<47A773AD.1010108@delphij.net> <47A7749B.8070100@FreeBSD.org> <1202158167.47a77a572701f@imp.free.fr>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
gregoryd.freebsd@free.fr wrote:
> Quoting Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>:
> 
>> Yes, there is no possibility of ULE 2.0 being merged to 6.x.  Use it in
>> 6.x if you dare, just don't complain to us if it breaks your system :-)
> 
> All right, I won't :-)
> 
>> i.e. if at any point you start experiencing problems, do not report them
>> until you have verified that they persist with 4BSD also.
> 
> I can hear you.
> Then again, I'm in the slow process of converting people in my office to use
> FreeBSD instead of GNU/Linux: it's not going to be easy if 6.3 4BSD exhibits
> slownesses when compiling a kernel, and 6.3 ULE might prove not that stable :-\
> (I've not encountered any problem until now, though, and I'm "touching wood" as
> my granny says)
> 
> By the way, why still include ULE in 6.x if it is to be avoided ?

Typically we don't remove even experimental (even broken) code in stable 
branches in case it is still useful to someone despite the problems.

Try 7.0 instead.

Kris



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47A77D36.6040102>