On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 12:05:14PM -0600, Rick Kelly wrote:
> Julio M. Merino Vidal said:
> 
> >You can write a small program that malloc(2)s a big amount of RAM (dunno
> >how many, but 256MB work for me) and touches all the bits in it.  After
> >running it, your umass device should work.
> 
> That is just unacceptable. Either USB works or it doesn't. Without working
> USB, 2.0 doesn't offer much over 1.6 for the average user.

I think you have overstated your claim. I agree that 2.0 should have
working USB support, and that it's disappointing that a fix for this
well-known bug doesn't exist. However, NetBSD offers many new features
and improvements which the average user will probably benefit form.

In particular, I'm really looking forward to native POSIX threads. I
think your average user will see improvements in the performance of
any threaded application (I definitely remember that being true for Linux).

-- Erik