From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jun 30 18:05:17 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FB2D16A4CE
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 30 Jun 2004 18:05:17 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from salmon.maths.tcd.ie (salmon.maths.tcd.ie [134.226.81.11])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B9A6F43D1F
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 30 Jun 2004 18:05:16 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie)
Received: from walton.maths.tcd.ie by salmon.maths.tcd.ie with SMTP
          id <aa58670@salmon>; 30 Jun 2004 19:05:07 +0100 (BST)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 19:05:06 +0100
From: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Message-ID: <20040630180506.GA57310@walton.maths.tcd.ie>
References: <2323.1088599241@critter.freebsd.dk>
	<2518.1088599647@critter.freebsd.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2518.1088599647@critter.freebsd.dk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i
Sender: dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: TEST/REVIEW: minor improvement to linux-o-lator
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 18:05:17 -0000

On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 02:47:27PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> And here is the correct patch file :-)
> the first one was the initial editing result.

Looks OK to me, though I wonder if both of these calls should have
been using linux_to_bsd_msg_flags() on the flags.

	David.