Subject: Re: procfs/kernfs "required"? [was Re: kernel & libkvm... ]
To: None <email@example.com, Chris_G_Demetriou@NIAGARA.NECTAR.CS.CMU.EDU>
From: James Graham - Systems Anarchist <greywolf@defender.VAS.viewlogic.com>
Date: 01/12/1996 17:07:06
#define AUTHOR "firstname.lastname@example.org ("Perry E. Metzger")"
* Oh, come now. Memory gets cheaper all the time.
Taken out of context, this statement would really bother me.
Cheaper memory, cheaper disk and faster processors are NO excuse
for sloppy design and shoddy programming.
However, you added
* ...This is not to say that stupid bloat is a good idea, but for
* legitimately good causes it isn't that bad...
I know what you meant, but it implies that stupid bloat is tolerable
for good causes. Good causes don't have stupid bloat...
* Its true that a lot of the NetBSD community is in to retrocomputing,
How do you mean this? In the sense that NetBSD only ports to "old"
computers? or that UNIX[*] is "obsolete" as a whole? I'd disagree with
both. I certainly don't see anything out there suitable for replacing
UNIX at the moment (I have bazooka shells ready for anyone who is stupid
enough to suggest that Loss95 or WonNT are "suitable for replacing
#undef AUTHOR /* "email@example.com ("Perry E. Metzger")" */
[*] Screw the trademark. I'm not selling or illegally trading this
e-mail for large amounts of profit.
Solaris 2 is not an upgrade from Solaris 1. They just want you to THINK it is.