Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 14:11:41 +0200 From: Vallo Kallaste <kalts@estpak.ee> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PFIL_HOOKS should be made default in 5.0 Message-ID: <20021221121141.GA945@tiiu.internal> In-Reply-To: <20021220212919.GA3543@tiiu.internal> References: <0a6201c2a6f9$42cfd720$52557f42@errno.com> <200212200127.MAA20942@avalon.reed.wattle.id.au> <20021220032930.GA67469@unixdaemons.com> <0e5401c2a7e1$37149090$52557f42@errno.com> <0e9701c2a7e2$cbe1de20$52557f42@errno.com> <20021220105251.GA1296@tiiu.internal> <3E0345B2.9E7D4C74@mindspring.com> <20021220212919.GA3543@tiiu.internal>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Dec 20, 2002 at 11:29:19PM +0200, Vallo Kallaste <vallo> wrote: > > > Yes, and this "undefined symbols" message will make no sense > > > from user perspective. > > > > Then fix it. The fix is trivial: > [description of possible fix snipped] > > As I've stated several times and as you most certainly know I'm not > developer. What are you trying to accomplish by the phrase "then fix > it"? Put me down, eh? > I have encountered this problem several times and for the first time > the message about unresolved symbol(s) made no sense and forced me > to do time consuming searches over the 'Net to get a clue what's > going on. Will we want to get possible users using FreeBSD or will > we want argue about it to death? The users get bored and move on, > that's it. Uh, sorry Terry. I was lightly drunk (just got back from party) yesterday when I wrote this. Althought the writing has some right points (from my side of view), the overall tone is rude. I'm so sorry. -- Vallo Kallaste kalts@estpak.ee To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021221121141.GA945>