[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  Manuel Kasper <mk at neon1 dot net>
 To:  jesse at wingnet dot net
 Cc:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] Re: FreeBSD 5.3 Released
 Date:  Sat, 20 Nov 2004 14:12:22 +0100
On 19.11.2004 16:22 -0500, Jesse Guardiani wrote:

> Sorry to revive an old thread like this, but this is on my mind a
> lot now that FreeBSD 5.3 is RELEASE quality and so far I haven't
> seen any mention of m0n0wall developers considering 5.x yet.

Not true. I've mentioned 5.x several times in the past, including
here:

<http://m0n0.ch/wall/list-dev/?action=show_msg&actionargs[]=5&actionargs[]=35>

Please, I'm absolutely sick of people begging for 5.3. I've said it
enough: yes, we will move to 5.3 eventually, and it's also likely
that one of the next betas will have 5.3 as the base system. But
begging for it is not going to make it happen sooner, and only pisses
me off, so please STOP!

Still, the only important advantage I can see right now is ath
support. And again, I think hostap is a very inferior alternative to
"real" APs that don't rely on a mostly unsupported feature and should
only be used where it's absolutely necessary to do everything on one
box. Besides, 5.3 isn't going to give us things like WPA either.

> I've seen a few companies making T1 CSU/DSU cards available for
> FreeBSD too. This adds to the core router idea. They're not likely
> to work under 4.x.

I assume you're talking about Sangoma cards. They do work under 4.x,
but it involves just a little more than compiling a driver into the
kernel (same with 5.x).

> So are the primary developer(s) thinking about 5.3 yet? How
> difficult would it be to move to 5.x, or better yet, support both
> kernels with the same base system?

You can't just use the kernel but not the base system. Even with 4.x
compatibility installed, some tools (like ifconfig) would break.

- Manuel