Subject: Re: Q's on 4.4-lite userland integration
To: Ty Sarna <tsarna@endicor.com>
From: Chris G. Demetriou <cgd@alpha.bostic.com>
List: current-users
Date: 07/26/1994 22:55:40
> In article <199407251228.WAA16595@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> Luke Mewburn <lm@rmit.edu.au> writes:
> > Does netbsd-current use lots of net/2.untainted code in userland?
> > If so, are there any plans to integrate 4.4-lite userland stuff,
> > especially stuff that hasn't had netbsd-local changes?
> > If yes, can we get an approximate timeframe?
> 
> I assume if this was going to be in 1.0 it would have happened long ago
> so I guess it'll be in 1.1/2.0/whatever. 

right.  we're not finishing killing whatever bugs we see, and wrapping
things up, to kick them out the door.

> Speaking of which, since we're getting close to 1.0, what are the goals
> for the next release (1.1 or 2.0 or whatever) in terms of new features,
> ports, etc?

it'll be 1.1, i hope.  8-)
I think at least a few of the new features have already been outlined.

AS for "in terms of ports": you just can't really have goals about
ports, because porting is, while very important to the NetBSD project,
mostly done by "individuals."  I.e. they do it when they can, and get
it done when they get it done, and you don't make any assumptions
about when those things may occur.  8-)

One of the goals of the next release will be more "support" for 64-bit
architectures, i.e. the kernel will get a little bit cleaner here and
there so they won't be such a pain in the butt.

> And, on an unrelated question, what's wrong with lamp?

unclear; it's crashing occasionally, but the majority of the time it's
down, something else is happening entirely, and we have _no_ clue
what.  The big problem is that i'm not in Berkeley any more to watch
it, and there's typically nobody around at all, let alone somebody
who could investigate what's wrong with it.

> It seems to be
> down more often than not lately. Is it down for testing, or hardware
> problems/upgrades or something?

The big problem is, it's in an office where there are people once
ever 24-36 hours, and they're only there for a few hours, at most.

We're in the process of getting things set up so that these problems
will change in the near future.  (change to what?  hopefully something
less severe.  8-)



chris

------------------------------------------------------------------------------