From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 9 18:43:51 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2377716A40F for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2006 18:43:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2DA943D69 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2006 18:43:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 261FB1A3C20 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2006 11:43:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EA192514F7; Sat, 9 Sep 2006 14:43:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 14:43:45 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060909184345.GA64903@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20060909173813.GA1388@FS.denninger.net> <200609092023.16454.max@love2party.net> <20060909182831.GA32004@FS.denninger.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ZGiS0Q5IWpPtfppv" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060909182831.GA32004@FS.denninger.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Subject: Re: ARRRRGH! Guys, who's breaking -STABLE's GMIRROR code?! X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 18:43:51 -0000 --ZGiS0Q5IWpPtfppv Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 01:28:31PM -0500, Karl Denninger wrote: > Yeah, -STABLE is what you should run if you want stable code, right? >=20 > C'mon guys. This sort of thing belies a total lack of concern when chang= es > are MFC'd into production branches of the code. This kind of thing is > expected if you're running -CURRENT, but not -STABLE. >=20 > How long would it have taken to actually test the change and detect this = once=20 > it was put in? All of 30 seconds? Please try to calm down, getting angry on the mailing list is only going to make everyone else angry too. Kris --ZGiS0Q5IWpPtfppv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFAwthWry0BWjoQKURApeiAJ9UGewQ41FlhgyCWc8HEYclz2ZpLgCg+Sr/ IPGxjl1NUPPDn1msHViVcUA= =uMcY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ZGiS0Q5IWpPtfppv--