Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 01:36:56 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.ORG>, Tim Robbins <tjr@FreeBSD.ORG>, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Removal of netns - politically correct version Message-ID: <3E65C538.A4F7A73A@mindspring.com> References: <3E6539B5.2F5D31B@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20030305084442.037e9fa0@gid.co.uk> <3E65BB24.3E37D90D@mindspring.com> <20030305011926.T18288@znfgre.tberna.bet>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug Barton wrote: > On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Terry Lambert wrote: > > The code is still useful as a simple implementation, much more > > easily understood by the student than the current TCP/IP stack, > > for certain. > > And it will still be available. It'll just be available in the Attic. The > fact that it will get more broken in the future because it's not being > maintained in the tree is not terribly significant since it's already > broken now. Why don't we let me sumbit patches, apply the things, and *then* dike the code out, if that's your reasoning? > > On the other hand, there's no compelling reason to dike it out, > > There is at least one, namely that it will make kernel code updates easier > to do, and easier to test. And here people were telling me I was wrong for cynically assuming that the reason people diked out so much code in the past year was because they wanted to perform kernel code updates, without having to maintain all the code they would be touching with those updates... > > if it can be made to work. I would argue that ISA support is > > more or less just as obsolete, as is 486 support, as is the F00F > > bug workaround, as is ... a lot of code that's still there. > > Your argument here is non sequitur because we still have large bases of > users and developers that have and use this hardware. I retired a box with > an original P90 f00f bug cpu not that long ago, for example. netns has > neither freebsd users or developers, and hasn't for years. And I have two XNS terminalservers, and there are people on this list with Apollo equipment. Your point was again? > > In any case, Peter pointed out that my patch was against -stable, > > not -current. I'm in the process of CVSup'ing new sources now, > > and will update the patch against -current, and post it, most > > likely tomorrow morning, if the CVSup doesn't complete in the next > > hour. > > I think that fixing the current brokeness is still useful, even if it gets > axed. Putting it to bed with a full tummy will make future educational > value of the code that much higher. I suggested that before. People are telling me they won't apply the patches before they murder the code. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E65C538.A4F7A73A>