Re: config(5) break down

[Johnny Billquist <bqt%softjar.se@localhost>]

Julio Merino wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Masao Uebayashi 
> <uebayasi%gmail.com@localhost> wrote:
> > Let me clarify:
> >
> > - NetBSD is used for many purposes.
> > - The official binary should choose the sane default
> >  - FFS_EI enabled by default
> >  - XIP would be disabled by default
> > - While leave developers freedom to customize NetBSD more.
>
> Err, no.  BOTH developers and users should have the freedom to
> customize NetBSD, not only developers.  And, of course, users should
> not have to rebuild anything, ever.  If we can't provide such a
> binary-friendly system, we have failed as developers.  And it's
> possible to provide such a system, as has been proven by Solaris,
> Windows and, increasingly, Linux.

So what are you saying here? That our goal is to be like Solaris, 
Windows and Linux?

What is the point in that? There already exist several systems (as you 
note) who are that. Do you expect NetBSD to be in that same segment?

Just curious about what people think/want here...

        Johnny

--
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                  ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt%softjar.se@localhost             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol