atom feed23 messages in org.freebsd.freebsd-currentRe: About GEOM...
FromSent OnAttachments
Mario GoebbelsJul 2, 2002 6:51 am 
Poul-Henning KampJul 3, 2002 1:43 am 
Julian ElischerJul 3, 2002 2:16 am 
Poul-Henning KampJul 3, 2002 2:59 am 
Simon DickJul 3, 2002 3:10 am 
Bruce EvansJul 3, 2002 4:23 am 
Poul-Henning KampJul 3, 2002 5:36 am 
Poul-Henning KampJul 3, 2002 6:47 am 
Bruce EvansJul 3, 2002 6:47 am 
Julian ElischerJul 3, 2002 9:30 am 
Terry LambertJul 3, 2002 10:44 am 
Wilko BulteJul 3, 2002 3:24 pm 
Bruce EvansJul 4, 2002 2:19 am 
Greg 'groggy' LeheyJul 4, 2002 2:22 am 
Mario GoebbelsJul 4, 2002 2:31 am 
Bruce EvansJul 4, 2002 2:37 am 
Bruce EvansJul 4, 2002 4:27 am 
Terry LambertJul 4, 2002 2:17 pm 
Daniel O'ConnorJul 4, 2002 7:09 pm 
Terry LambertJul 4, 2002 7:39 pm 
"Vladimir B. " GrebenschikovJul 5, 2002 2:38 am 
Terry LambertJul 5, 2002 5:05 am 
Paul HermanJul 5, 2002 8:14 am 
Subject:Re: About GEOM...
From:Bruce Evans (bd@zeta.org.au)
Date:Jul 4, 2002 2:19:38 am
List:org.freebsd.freebsd-current

On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

In message <2002@gamplex.bde.org>, Bruce Evans writes:

This is mostly because resources have been diverted away from updating working code to write a second system.

Make that third system, the current slice/label code is our second system, and I don't think the resources have been diverted as much as defected.

Either way, I know you don't want either of DEVFS or GEOM, I think I know where you come from, I just happen to not agree that we should stay stuck back there.

I disagree that DEVFS and GEOM are forwards.

Bruce

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message