[ On Monday, March 4, 2002 at 15:05:26 (-0500), Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: removal of brk()/sbrk().
>
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 02:39:37PM -0500, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> > [ On Monday, March 4, 2002 at 10:52:10 (-0500), Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: ]
> > > Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: removal of brk()/sbrk().
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 09:12:23AM -0500, Todd Vierling wrote:
> > > > GENERIC *is* our example configuration.  There's a couple extras on some
> > > > ports, like FOURMEG et al, and those intended for small memory machines
> > > 
> > > "A couple"?  i386 has *24*.
> > > 
> > > Some of these are GENERIC_XYZ configurations, and some are INSTALL_XYZ, 
> > > but there are a lot more than "a couple" of others.  And if they're not
> > > "examples", why are they in our distribution?
> > 
> > The INSTALL_* kernels are not really "examples".  They are very specific
> 
> I am curious just how, exactly, you parsed my text as an English sentence
> and decided that the referent of "they" and "they're" was anything but
> "others".

How, exactly, do you know I meant any more than I wrote?  I was just
pointing out something that none of you had made explicitly clear yet in
this thread.

-- 
								Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098;  <gwoods@acm.org>;  <g.a.woods@ieee.org>;  <woods@robohack.ca>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>