Re: rump is complete

2011-03-21 Thread Christoph Egger
On 21.03.11 16:45, Antti Kantee wrote: > Hi, > > I have accomplished everything I want to with rump and plan to declare it > stable in NetBSD 6. This implies adding new interfaces will slow down, > and changing old old ones will require backward compat. > > If you are interested in the unique po

Re: rump is complete

2011-03-21 Thread Antti Kantee
On Mon Mar 21 2011 at 12:47:24 -0700, Sanjay Lal wrote: > I was curious about running NetBSD kernel code in user land run on kernels > other than NetBSD? For instance, running the NetBSD networking stack in > userland on Linux etc? What would be required to get such a system going? This is pro

Re: rump is complete

2011-03-21 Thread Sanjay Lal
Hi Antti, congratulations on all your hard work. I was curious about running NetBSD kernel code in user land run on kernels other than NetBSD? For instance, running the NetBSD networking stack in userland on Linux etc? What would be required to get such a system going? Regards and thanks Sa

Re: libquota proposal

2011-03-21 Thread Christos Zoulas
On Mar 21, 8:29pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote: -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal | On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 03:22:18PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote: | > On Mar 21, 5:25pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote: | > -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal | > | > | > We should

Re: libquota proposal

2011-03-21 Thread Manuel Bouyer
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 03:22:18PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote: > On Mar 21, 5:25pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote: > -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal > > | > We should get rid of quota1 and this direct support. > | > | maybe, but after 6.0. > > But then are you going to go bac

Re: rump is complete

2011-03-21 Thread Jean-Yves Migeon
On 21.03.2011 16:45, Antti Kantee wrote: > Hi, > > I have accomplished everything I want to with rump and plan to declare it > stable in NetBSD 6. This implies adding new interfaces will slow down, > and changing old old ones will require backward compat. > > If you are interested in the unique

Re: libquota proposal

2011-03-21 Thread Christos Zoulas
On Mar 21, 5:25pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote: -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal | > We should get rid of quota1 and this direct support. | | maybe, but after 6.0. But then are you going to go back and change quota2->quota? And if yes, why not now? christos

Re: libquota proposal

2011-03-21 Thread Manuel Bouyer
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:47:38AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote: > On Mar 21, 2:21pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote: > -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal > > | On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:18:28PM +, David Holland wrote: > | > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 06:19:30PM +0100, Manuel Bouye

Re: rump is complete

2011-03-21 Thread Stefano Marinelli
> I have accomplished everything I want to with rump and plan to declare it > stable in NetBSD 6. This implies adding new interfaces will slow down, > and changing old old ones will require backward compat. Thank you for this, Antti. This is a huge step ahead for NetBSD, and a very interesting f

Re: libquota proposal

2011-03-21 Thread Christos Zoulas
On Mar 21, 2:21pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote: -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal | On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:18:28PM +, David Holland wrote: | > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 06:19:30PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote: | > > > > At this point, in the source 'quota1' is used for the o

rump is complete

2011-03-21 Thread Antti Kantee
Hi, I have accomplished everything I want to with rump and plan to declare it stable in NetBSD 6. This implies adding new interfaces will slow down, and changing old old ones will require backward compat. If you are interested in the unique possibilities offered by rump, now is a good time to ch

Re: gsoc idea: xmlif

2011-03-21 Thread Antti Kantee
On Sun Mar 20 2011 at 23:08:56 +0200, Vladimir Kirillov wrote: > Hello, tech-kern@! > > I've been browsing around the 2011 GSoC ideas and have hit this: > > Research converting system interfaces to XML > http://wiki.netbsd.org/projects/gsoc_2011/xmlif/ > > I have been researching on the topic of

Re: libquota proposal

2011-03-21 Thread Manuel Bouyer
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:18:28PM +, David Holland wrote: > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 06:19:30PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote: > > > > At this point, in the source 'quota1' is used for the old > > > > quota format, 'quota2' for the new one and 'quota' for the few things > > > > that are common.

Re: libquota proposal

2011-03-21 Thread David Holland
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 06:19:30PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote: > > > At this point, in the source 'quota1' is used for the old > > > quota format, 'quota2' for the new one and 'quota' for the few things > > > that are common. > > > > Everything outside the kernel should be in the last categor