Hey,

Tim Kelly wrote:

In my opinion you are casting dark shadows... wen is "2.0" about due ? I
think it all has to do that the nice daemons drwan by de Raadt
disappeared and that we have some kind of "logo" that is clean and
aseptic and that hasno trident, no daemon, no "unix" in it.. but it may
be just me.
 
> My point is, we are in danger of holding up the 2.0 release. We can't do
> that. We are better off freezing the RC cycle until we meet our own
> milestones, like a rock solid X. Then, when we are synced with the
> latest tag, we can announce that macppc is tagged. And when we finally
> reach -release quality, we do another announcement. Everytime we do an
> announcement it brings publicity for NetBSD. That is a lot better than
> releasing something as 2.0 that is probably a step backwards from 1.6.2,
> due to architectural/port issues and not due to the 2.0 kernel.

from my PoV the only problem that got in addition to 1.6.2 was the sync
stuff that we could see as "almost fixed".
On my machine, 1.6.2 had not a working X, had no usable mc0 and boot
problems. That is "no new problems" so 2,0 wouldn't be a worse
experience than 1.6.2 was.

other stuff like non-working XDM or not-existent ADB keyboard map can
only be discovered by "using" the thing.

I have a 4400 that I use at the moment headless (so no X problems...)
the isntallation was easier and everything seems to work. Only the
ethernet card (a realtek) gives _massive_ trouble. For the rest, all is
fine since I don't use some features. I wouldn't be so negative and if
someone can help Michael besides testing liek I do I think we canget a
lot of problems solved.

-R