On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Greg A. Woods wrote:

> Having talked to some commercial users who don't want to use NetBSD, I
> think I can say that I know what I'm talking about.

On the other hand, I know commercial users who would be more
reluctant to use NetBSD if you implemented the sort of things you're
talking about.

A lot of this is not a matter of actual goodness, but just taste.
You can run perfectly fine and stable commerical systems on NetBSD
as it stands, though you and others would say different, and point
out a lot of `essential' features that are missing.. You can, in
fact, run perfectly fine and stable commerical apps on Unix, though
many VMS users would disagree, and point out a lot of `essential'
features that are missing.

It really sounds to me at this point that you are looking for enough
in the way of System Visms that you would really be much happier
with System V. So why not just move on to a system that has the
features you want?

> I'm not actually talking about using this mechanism for adjusting the
> probe results (i.e. what FreeBSD does), but rather for pre-wiring the
> device assignments.

This I find quite amazing. First you're complaining that stuff
moves around too easily, and now you're looking for an even more
dynamic method of updating things than our current one? We don't
even have to change a controller here; just have an admin enter
the wrong information on boot, or one file get changed) to have a
system that will effectively have random changes in its configuration.

cjs
--
Curt Sampson  <cjs@portal.ca>  604-257-9400    De gustibus, aut bene aut nihil.
Any opinions expressed are mine and mine alone.
The most widely ported operating system in the world: http://www.netbsd.org