Subject: Re: NEW_BUFQ really cool!
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Christian Biere <email@example.com>
Date: 03/30/2003 21:56:11
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Wojciech Puchar <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> my system works for 6 days, no crash, no errors in dmesg, loaded all
> the time quite heavy.
> shouldn't NEW_BUFQ be default?
Aren't wscons (for i386) and softdep used by default in 1.6? I can use
bugs in both to crash NetBSD instantly. IMHO, the filesystem is really
the most crucial part because corrupted executables or a corrupted
swap could cause total havoc to a system even if everything else is
virtually bug-free. Thus, I'd be very careful with turning on with
features by default - I highly assume the maintainers are. Especially,
if you're using i386, a stable system might prove little as it's the
most used architecture and bugs which affect only other architectures
often remain unnoticed for a long time.
I know that the NetBSD developers do a very great job and always focus
on portability by definition. Nevertheless, I wanted to post this and,
of course, I'm also looking forward to enable NEW_BUFQ.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----