On Friday, 29 October 2004 at 14:20:40 -0600, secmgr wrote: > Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > >> A bit of background: we know that 'gvinum' will replace Vinum; the >> original intention had been to do it seamlessly, but for various >> reasons that did happen. Then we decided that we should leave them >> both in the tree until gvinum had the full functionality of Vinum. >> It's beginning to look like that's a bad idea. Lukas is >> (understandably) working only on gvinum, and since I know it's nearly >> there, I'm not going to do any further work on Vinum in FreeBSD 5. >> Given the problems, I'd suggest that we yank it. I'm copying the >> release engineering team. Re, what do you think? > > Not that I've got a lot of say in the matter, but I would vote for this > too. (along with migration info in the release notes).
I've spoken to Scott Long on the subject, and it looks likely that we'll do something like this; but re haven't made a final decision. > There are also some minor changes needed to the docs on vinumvm.org > for gvinum/newfs (5.3) to correct new paths and switches. So far, vinumvm.org has no information about gvinum at all. Hopefully that will change at some time. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
