Ted Lemon said:
> 
> > Does that mean that the FreeBSD development should move forward,
> > and then when we  have reproduceable benchmarks on FreeBSD, then
> > you can choose to adopt our code, or leave it be?
> 
> Why do you have to have different code?   Why not try the current code
> on for size, see how it works, and *then* propopose i386-specific
> enhancements if the need arises?
> 
> It *sucks* that we're still not going to have sharable device drivers.
> Device drivers are thin on the ground in the Free BSD community.  I
> think it's worth a *lot* of effort to try to improve device driver
> sharing.  I'm not saying this with the intent of offending anybody - I
> think it's a fairly obvious truth.  An incompatible API ought to be a
> *clear* win, and it ought to be *minimally* incompatible.  Nothing
> I've heard so far suggests that this is the case.
> 
If there is going to be an emotional or legal toll, why should we
cooperate?  Frankly, I give up (again), after seeing the extreme
lack of respect for a FreeBSD-core member, and also the other tirade
that was imposed on one of the FreeBSD lists.

Frankly, FreeBSD does not need NetBSD, and probably vice-versa.  If
people are going to act like arrogant SOB's, it just doesn't appear
to be worth it.

If people can just listen, and not appeal to relatively non-existant
authority, then thre is a chance.  As it is, there is more arrogance
than ideas being communicated.  It seems that in this group, certain
individuals think that NetBSD's only peer in the world is NT.  In
my opinion, it seems that the only way that NetBSD might have a peer
in NT is in the culture of arrogance.

With no arrogance and good cooperation, then FreeBSD can be NetBSD's
best friend, but being dismissed, FreeBSD won't care at all about
NetBSD and move on.

-- 
John                  | Never try to teach a pig to sing,
dyson@freebsd.org     | it just makes you look stupid,
jdyson@nc.com         | and it irritates the pig.