On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Daniel Carosone wrote:

# On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 01:58:01PM +1000, matthew green wrote:
# mrg> i wish i had the hardware to do this.  send me a few supported
# mrg> multiport serial cards?  i just don't have the supported hardware
# mrg> to have all my machines with serial console connected at the
# mrg> same time, and this feature would be useful for the couple that
# mrg> do not have soft power (ie, halt -p doesn't work.)
#
# Sure, the original feature and small patch could be useful for all
# sorts of circumstances.  One that I can imagine is when working
# with unskilled remote tentacles.  I can say "unplug it once it beeps".
#
# Everything since then is .. questionable at best.

I can't believe I'm seeing this.  This is lunacy at its finest.

The same people who are sitting here extolling the virtues of a
dynamically-linked root filesystem are the ones saying, "a 3 kilobyte
difference in the kernel is bloat" (if you want to debate this one,
and I'd rather not, take it off-line with me, please.  This equine
has ceased to be).

Talk about backward priorities.  This looks to be a very useful feature
to have (and from what I saw of the poor bloke dealing with the mac68k
port not running properly with said dynamically linked root, I dare say
it's a more productive feature, byte for byte)!

What's such the big deal about this?  Does everyone really have a
fantastic hardware budget, or even an adequate one?  To quote a phrase,
"Gee, it _must_ _be_ _nice_," because *I'm* sure not endowed to pick up
any more hardware!

Seeing how many OTHER things are OPTIONAL in the kernel, I see absolutely
no reason not to allow this one.  One could argue that BLINK is useless
and meet up with similar complaints that the BEEP_ON_HALT code is meeting.

I'm this -><- close to uttering three potentially offensive words.  I'll
save them for the time being.

				--*greywolf;
-- 
NetBSD is PAR -- Powerful, Advanced, Reliable.  Is your OS up to PAR?