--rd/3IrB17klb+Ksj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 03:09:35PM -0700, Simon J. Gerraty wrote:
> a/ my setup predates this by a couple of years.

why wasn't it committed?  this reinventing of a wheel wouldn't be
necessary..

> c/ my current setup makes it simpler to document the states that the
>    system can be in - helps when being validated for FIPS and common
>    criteria.   Simple is good.

this is something i can agree with.  althought i still think matt's
design is superior, it has a head and a tail, while yours is just "run
ahead and burn all the bridges behind us".

in the end, i don't really care that much.  the current patch sure
helped me to create and test my ramdisk image which would be more pain
with your design (since you will need to reboot after every minor
failure); and it sure will be annoying for other potential users of this
feature.  but if it's accepted to the base system, it's better than
having to keep patches in my local tree.

regards,

--=20
-- Lubomir Sedlacik <salo@{NetBSD,Xtrmntr,silcnet}.org>   --

--rd/3IrB17klb+Ksj
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFCpbNEiwjDDlS8cmMRAtitAJ9PZqOsvd/xJ3bztgyvxMfM21xU1wCgjhwa
p7uQnisl5XRw8sxI9vG5bQ4=
=aaMu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--rd/3IrB17klb+Ksj--