jconklin@netcom.COM (J.T. Conklin) wrote:

>> > I've heard several times that the core team doesn't "like" John
>> > Dyson's work for FreeBSD, without specific information. While
>> > FreeBSD

>> :-(.

>:-( from me too.

>It goes against the NetBSD mission for us to automatically dismiss
>(or automatically accept) an idea and/or implementation based on its
>origins.

My statement is misinterpreted here. The code was disliked, not the
person who wrote it or one of the organisations he work with. However,
what exactly is wrong with the code remains unknown for me.

In my earlier message, I stated that I recognised no FreeBSD problems
related to VM code. That was a bit too optimistic. There is a problem
that a FreeBSD machine may lock up for a couple of seconds under
certain circumstances, especially heavy use of buffer caches. I didn't
encouter it myself, since I don't have a FreeBSD under heavy load, but
as far as I understand, the problem will cause repeated lockups once
it occurs and force (but not cause) a reboot of the machine. The
problem was discussed on FreeBSD-current@freebsd.org some days ago.

[...]

>In summary, I think when the VM survey is begun that the FreeBSD VM
>system needs to be considered.  And if we decide to experiment with
>or adopt it, I hope that John is willing to offer us assistance and 
>advice.

He already offered this about a month ago on one of NetBSD's
maillists. However, he warned about the major differences in FreeBSD's
and NetBSD's kernel architecture. Using his work probably means
implementing, not porting.

Martin
-- 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Martin Cracauer <cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de>  - BSD User Group Hamburg, Germany 
"As far as I'm concerned,  if something is so complicated that you can't ex-"
"plain it in 10 seconds, then it's probably not worth knowing anyway"- Calvin