Joe Shevland joe.shevl...@gmail.com writes:
My thoughts are below - remembering its a volunteer project, people
spend their precious time to make it happen, and
noneofthatwisthandingitsstilldamngood:
a) if you don't like it, fix it.
b) if you can't fix it, pay someone else to fix it
c) if
The Project is ultimately about the users, right? There are early signs that
some old FreeBSD users get tired from those changes, those removals, lesser
POLA adherence, marketing-not-technical-stuff for time-not-feature-based
releases, not so stable -STABLE as it used to be, and so on,
Hi Andriy Gapon!
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:39:53 +0300; Andriy Gapon wrote about 'Re: HEADS UP:
FreeBSD 6.4 and 8.0 EoLs coming soon':
The Project is ultimately about the users, right? There are early signs that
some old FreeBSD users get tired from those changes, those removals, lesser
POLA
on 21/09/2010 15:36 Vadim Goncharov said the following:
Hi Andriy Gapon!
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:39:53 +0300; Andriy Gapon wrote about 'Re: HEADS UP:
FreeBSD 6.4 and 8.0 EoLs coming soon':
The Project is ultimately about the users, right? There are early signs that
some old FreeBSD users
On 2010-09-21 13:39, Andriy Gapon wrote:
The Project is ultimately about the users, right? There are early signs that
some old FreeBSD users get tired from those changes, those removals, lesser
POLA adherence, marketing-not-technical-stuff for time-not-feature-based
releases, not so stable
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Andriy Gapon a...@icyb.net.ua wrote:
[...]
If you want to shape the future of the project, then participate in the places
where the future is shaped. If you want to know what's coming up in the
future,
then watch the places where the future is shaped. If you
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 02:59:46PM +0200, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
On 2010-09-21 13:39, {some mysterious person :-)} wrote:
The Project is ultimately about the users, right? There are early signs that
some old FreeBSD users get tired from those changes, those removals, lesser
POLA adherence,
On 2010-09-21 15:16, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 02:59:46PM +0200, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
On 2010-09-21 13:39, {some mysterious person :-)} wrote:
The Project is ultimately about the users, right? There are early signs that
some old FreeBSD users get tired from those
Hi Willem Jan Withagen!
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:59:46 +0200; Willem Jan Withagen wrote about 'Re: HEADS
UP: FreeBSD 6.4 and 8.0 EoLs coming soon':
I'm a FreeBSD user as early as 1993, still have the first 1.0 CD here as
nice remembrance. So I guess that I qualify as one of those old
Hi Andriy Gapon!
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:53:56 +0300; Andriy Gapon wrote about 'Re: HEADS UP:
FreeBSD 6.4 and 8.0 EoLs coming soon':
Hmm, it's really simple.
If you want to shape the future of the project, then participate in the
places
where the future is shaped. If you want to know
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Vadim Goncharov vadim_nucli...@mail.ru wrote:
I give up.
Thank $DEITY.
Cheers
Tom
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
On 21/09/2010 11:49 PM, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
On 2010-09-21 15:16, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 02:59:46PM +0200, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
On 2010-09-21 13:39, {some mysterious person :-)} wrote:
The Project is ultimately about the users, right? There are early
signs
On 9/21/2010 6:54 AM, Vadim Goncharov wrote:
This thread, to this moment, has one practical statement: calls for
volunteers and other major notifications should go to announce@,
perhaps to Web site, too
... and since you've made that point, and several people in the project
leadership have
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010, Vadim Goncharov wrote:
Which part of support for the Giant lock *over the network stack* was
removed [emphasis mine] do you not understand?
No, component removed was (1), I've underlined.
The reason is performance for overall network stack, not ideology.
For a
The reason is performance for overall network stack, not ideology.
For a practical reasons, it works but slow is better than
doesn't work at all (due to absence of code in the src tree).
Make it work. Make it right. Make it fast. In that order, know this?
Sacrificing work for fast?.. Hmm,
Hi Robert Watson!
On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 11:47:29 +0100 (BST); Robert Watson wrote about 'Re: HEADS
UP: FreeBSD 6.4 and 8.0 EoLs coming soon':
It seems code exists :-)
http://old.nabble.com/ISDN4BSD-on-8-current-td23919925.html
ISDN4BSD package has been updated to compile on FreeBSD
8
on 07/09/2010 13:38 Vadim Goncharov said the following:
Just to clarify things a little for those following it: the original I4B
code
was removed for entirely practical reasons: it couldn't run without the
Giant
lock, and support for the Giant lock over the network stack was removed.
P.S. why is security@ in cc: ?
Original announcement:
Message-id: 4c7e71dc.1040...@freebsd.org
From: FreeBSD Security Officer cperc...@freebsd.org
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 08:31:40 -0700 (17:31 CEST)
To: FreeBSD Stable freebsd-stable@freebsd.org,
freebsd security
07.09.10 @ 18:53 Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 07/09/2010 13:38 Vadim Goncharov said the following:
Just to clarify things a little for those following it:
the original I4B code was removed
^ (1)
for entirely practical reasons: it couldn't run without the Giant
On 09/07/2010 02:31 PM, Vadim Goncharov wrote:
07.09.10 @ 18:53 Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 07/09/2010 13:38 Vadim Goncharov said the following:
Just to clarify things a little for those following it:
the original I4B code was removed
^ (1)
for entirely practical
[removed security@ which is not nearly related to topic]
On 09/07/10 23:31, Vadim Goncharov wrote:
07.09.10 @ 18:53 Andriy Gapon wrote:
The reason is performance for overall network stack, not ideology.
For a practical reasons, it works but slow is better than
doesn't work at all (due to
On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
- Or whatever other method to get ISDN back in kernel ?
It seems code exists :-)
http://old.nabble.com/ISDN4BSD-on-8-current-td23919925.html
ISDN4BSD package has been updated to compile on FreeBSD
8-current
On November 30th, FreeBSD 6.4 and FreeBSD 8.0 will have reached their
FreeBSD -7 -8 do not support ISDN I'm told.
So 6.4 is the last working FreeBSD ISDN.
DSL is faster than ISDN, but
Losing ISDN would be unfortunate:
- Not all can get DSL speed, if they live far from phone exchange.
- ISDN
FreeBSD -7 -8 do not support ISDN I'm told.
So 6.4 is the last working FreeBSD ISDN.
Could FreeBSD reinsert ISDN back into current/8/7 support ?
Perhaps via:
- a student SOC project ?
- FreeBSD foundation paying a FreeBSD consultant (I know one who has the
expertise already, has the
On Wednesday 01 September 2010 18:53:46 Julian H. Stacey wrote:
FreeBSD -7 -8 do not support ISDN I'm told.
So 6.4 is the last working FreeBSD ISDN.
Could FreeBSD reinsert ISDN back into current/8/7 support ?
Perhaps via:
- a student SOC project ?
- FreeBSD foundation paying a
Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com writes:
Hello,
FreeBSD -7 -8 do not support ISDN I'm told.
It seems that hps@ maintains an isdn stack outside of freebsd tree :
http://www.selasky.org/hans_petter/isdn4bsd/
Regards
Éric Masson
--
Une RedHat (je ne connais pas les autres distributions)
Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Wednesday 01 September 2010 18:53:46 Julian H. Stacey wrote:
FreeBSD -7 -8 do not support ISDN I'm told.
So 6.4 is the last working FreeBSD ISDN.
Could FreeBSD reinsert ISDN back into current/8/7 support ?
Perhaps via:
- a student SOC project ?
[trimmed cc list]
Julian,
On 09/01/10 18:09, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
On November 30th, FreeBSD 6.4 and FreeBSD 8.0 will have reached their
FreeBSD -7 -8 do not support ISDN I'm told.
So 6.4 is the last working FreeBSD ISDN.
Somebody told you wrong.
There's still i4b code in 7-STABLE.
Hi,
Reference:
From: vol...@vwsoft.com
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 23:10:32 +0200
Message-id: 4c7ec148.9040...@vwsoft.com
vol...@vwsoft.com wrote:
[trimmed cc list]
Julian,
On 09/01/10 18:09, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
On November 30th, FreeBSD 6.4 and FreeBSD 8.0 will
29 matches
Mail list logo
