On Mar 17, 1:20pm, mar...@duskware.de (Martin Husemann) wrote: -- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/distrib/common/bootimage
| On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:53:16AM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote: | >Can you please state the criteria that make you say that ptyfs is expensive? | | Ok, I take that back, I completely misremembered: | | As you say, it is like 10kb of code (9.5 on VAX), plus some runtime | data structures. | | And actually on the CD image, I flipped it over to *USE* ptyfs in the | end, as that avoids another tmpfs instance, which was way more expensive. | And the scripts deal with both variants already. Thanks Martin, There are some outliers there where it will make a difference (sun2-FOURMEG etc.). In the end we have to really start thinking about what needs to be done with these ancient configurations. What I am suggesting here, is to make the change on HEAD. If in the next couple of years (assuming we follow our regular release schedule for NetBSD-8), nobody tests and there is a problem with the change so be it. If someone tests and discovers it is broken, then we can fix it. In 2000 it was cool to be able to say that we are running in machines that were 15 years old. It is now 15 years later and those machines are 30 years old, and even if we can run of them, we can't expect anything useful to be done with them other than look at them in astonishment (that they still work and can run -- very slowly). At the other end of the spectrum, there are tons new machines, drivers, subsystems, API's out there that we would like to be able to support. We have only so much manpower, and if we keep bringing forward quirks to support all the old archs we would be wasting resources better spent elsewhere. I am not talking about breaking old ports on purpose; I am just talking about modernizing them. If they survive, good for them. If they die, perhaps it is for the best. Look at what's happening to the VAX port. We all love the port (at least I do), and we have put significant work in carrying it forward (elf/pic/gcc) but still even with our best efforts lately we still don't have a fully working system. Perhaps the best answer is: if you still want a working system for arch <X> look at release <Y>. If you are interested in bringing <X> up to speed, more power to you! Go for it, and we'll help you as much as we can. christos
