Re: Status of revivesa

[Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui%ceres.dti.ne.jp@localhost>]

buhrow%lothlorien.nfbcal.org@localhost wrote:

>       Hello.  As a long time NetBSD user,I'd rather see 5.0 delayed so that
> binary compatibility can be retained, rather than having binary
> compatibility break so radically between 4.0 and 5.0. Doing that would be
> worse than the binary change from a.out to ELF as happened between 1.4 and
> 1.5.  We may not want to support SA as an ongoing development strategy in
> the future, but we've supported it in the past, and I think it is better to
> live with keeping it and making all past version binaries work than  it is
> to drop it entirely.
> Just my 2 cents.

There is one black joke:

 If 5.0 is so delayed, some other *BSD guys will take our WAPBL code and
 will claim "we are the first OS which has FFS journaling in the release."

If revivesa will be tested and merged on proper schedule it's fine.
But we don't see any reasonable regressions yet.
---
Izumi Tsutsui