on 10/25/05 8:50 AM, thelarsons3@cox.net at thelarsons3@cox.net wrote:

>> also because after
>> some "hardware death" that I am affected from those are the only two
>> reasonable powerful 68k macs that I have currently available, however I
> 
> Riccardo, was it you who needed a Q840 power supply?  I have one from a
> machine the mobo died on...but the PS is still good.
> 
>> think that the sparse coding efforts in mac68k (if someone still codes
>> at all) would be better spent in getting 2.1 into shape again before
>> "stretching" to new platforms.
> 
> Yes, it's a sad fact that m68k is dying.  I'd rather see support solidified
> for what we have at this point than trying to support a couple oddball
> machines.  What exactly is the issue with 2.x?  Has anyone nailed it down?
> I've seen reports of "general flakiness" but sporadically - other people say
> it works fine.
> 

Normally I would wholeheartedly agree with you, however I happen to own one
of said oddball machines.   So, I have just a wee bit of a bias. ;)

Yes, it truly is sad that support for the mac68k is dying; I really like
NetBSD.