Do we want to split release.9 into MD parts now or not?

[David O'Brien]

On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 12:34:23PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> [Reattaching current@ as this turns out to be a normal discussion.]

Err, Why??  You seem to want to turn this into a bikeshed.  Thing like
this should be coordinated, designed, and prototyped by a small group of
people and then presented.  I'm not going to get into a long winded
thread with you on this in this forum.


> >>> .if ${TARGET_ARCH} == "alpha" && !defined(NO_FLOPPIES)
> 
> A bandaid for Alpha kern.flp being low on space (kgzip(1)
> support would fix that).
 
You seem to be the only one strongly arguing for boot floppies on Alpha,
and you don't even own one [yet].  I guess they provide a fun challenge
for you, but the rest of us that do release builds have come to totally
hate them.


> >>> .elif ${TARGET_ARCH} == "ia64"
> 
> ia64 provides the EFI boot loader; there are rumors that
> for newer ia32 machines this could also be made a case.

Won't be for Athlon PC's.

> Overall, I think that having 9 architecture ifdefs for

You forgot the whole small, and if this exists and that exists, and then
do foo.  The makefile is a mess.  We've been in-line ".ifdef" special
casing everything related to the floppies and CDROM boot image for too
long.  We would never tolerate that in our C code.

-- 
-- David  (obrien at FreeBSD.org)