On Wednesday 10 December 2003 11:12, you wrote: > Quoting Eriq Lamar <eqe_at_cox.net>: > > On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 22:53, David O'Brien wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 10:43:02PM -0500, eqe_at_cox.net wrote: > > > > Isn't alpha dead? Why bother supporting them in 5.2 it seems like > > > > wasted energy. Yes people still use it but for them there is 4.9 > > > > which works fine. You could better serve the freebsd community by > > > > focusing on the future of computing like amd64, great dual support, > > > > better drivers, etc. and most people know this, so why not let alpha > > > > die. I personally like alpha but it has no future. > > > > > > What is the purpose of this email?!? > > > > 1. why not read the message body I think I explained it in plain > > english. > > > > > So what's your point? > > > > 2. for my point read 1. > > Sending mail like this is pretty much flamebait. Alpha is not dead, and > last I heard whoever owns rights to it this week is still releasing new > hardware, although they aren't hyping it at all. > > Ken sorry it was my impression that their would be no further versions of alpha and or at least it's growth is suspect. But I will reseach this now. and again this email was just a thought about improving freebsd as a whole nothing more I just found it strange that in 5.2 there would be so much backward compatability and could not help but wonder for what purpose I would never build a new server with a 386,486,or 586 for that matter.Received on Wed Dec 10 2003 - 16:50:33 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:33 UTC