From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 28 20:53:03 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F8EA16A4CE for ; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 20:53:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from odot.okladot.state.ok.us (odot.okladot.state.ok.us [192.149.244.9]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66C4943D4C for ; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 20:53:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from root@techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us) Received: from techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us (techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us [199.27.9.37])PAA16452; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 15:52:54 -0500 Received: by techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us (Postfix, from userid 0) id C22B15C29; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 15:52:54 -0500 (CDT) To: In-Reply-To: <20040628.095605.13314562.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <3949.1088292437@critter.freebsd.dk> <20040626.181218.21873777.imp@bsdimp.com> <40DF2607.5020409@mac.com> <40DF2607.5020409@mac.com> <20040628.095605.13314562.imp@bsdimp.com> From: "Paul Seniura" Errors-To: "Paul Seniura" Sender: "Paul Seniura" Message-Id: <20040628205254.C22B15C29@techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us> Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 15:52:54 -0500 (CDT) cc: current@freebsd.org cc: "M. Warner Losh" Subject: just like midi/seq was treated? (was Re: HEADSUP: ibcs2 and svr4 compat headed for history) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Paul Seniura List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 20:53:03 -0000 > In message: <40DF2607.5020409@mac.com> > Chuck Swiger writes: > : In other words, I care quite a bit about how "working, supported > : functionality" gets transitioned to "no longer available". I'm not happy with > : the notion of "supported" -> "HEADS UP" -> one week -> gone. > > It appears that this is widely used enough that it won't be removed. > I agree that this is a too streamlined path. > > Warner Not to change the topic of this thread, but -- I wish someone had said that a few weeks ago while I complained about midi/seq support being removed without a replacement. ...STILL waiting... ...wondering if 5.3-R is going to have it at all... ...and I still have _no_ idea where it is being 'discussed'... -- thx, Paul Seniura System Specialist State of Okla. D.O.T.