Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 16:34:38 +0100 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, Mikael Karpberg <karpen@ocean.campus.luth.se> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bootstrap syntax (was Re: HEADS UP! (was: cvs commit: src/sys/sys reboot.h src/sys/i386/i386 autoconf.c) ) Message-ID: <19980312163438.62825@follo.net> In-Reply-To: <199803121520.HAA27524@dingo.cdrom.com>; from Mike Smith on Thu, Mar 12, 1998 at 07:20:37AM -0800 References: <199803121449.PAA17427@ocean.campus.luth.se> <199803121520.HAA27524@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Mar 12, 1998 at 07:20:37AM -0800, Mike Smith wrote: > > > (This isn't going to happen in the short term though; too much > > > backwards-compatability grief.) > > > > Hmm... > > Isn't this something which is purely userinterface? And if not, why not? > > It would bite: > > - people with old boot.config files > - people with old boot.help files > - people that expected the old syntax to work > > The support issues this would raise would be enormous. boot.config and boot.help is fairly new files (post 2.2.5, aren't they?); and updating bootblocks is usually not done, at least not be people that don't know enough to also know those files. If we are going to change the format, I think _now_ would be a good time, before it has been in a release. Eivind. 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?19980312163438.62825>