From owner-freebsd-current Sun Feb 24 1: 0: 3 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from k6.locore.ca (k6.locore.ca [198.96.117.170]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9981237B404; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 00:59:58 -0800 (PST) Received: (from jake@localhost) by k6.locore.ca (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g1O90gL39934; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 04:00:42 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jake) Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 04:00:41 -0500 From: Jake Burkholder To: Julian Elischer Cc: John Baldwin , dillon@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: First (easy) td_ucred patch Message-ID: <20020224040041.C35990@locore.ca> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from julian@elischer.org on Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 11:21:24AM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Apparently, On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 11:21:24AM -0800, Julian Elischer said words to the effect of; > > > On Fri, 22 Feb 2002, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > > http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/patches/ucred.patch > > > the structural rewriting in kern_proc.c should be done as a separate > commit. (though I agree it should be done) > > the structural rewriting in kern/sysv_*.c > could be done as a separate commit as well. > (I agree it is worth doing) > > I'll let you get away with unp_listen() :-) I'd like to point out that in all cases that you mention, the original structure before the "giant pushdown" is being restored. A lot of structural rewriting occured in those commits. It was not done separately. I don't recall if the patches were posted for review, I certainly never saw them. This strikes me as a double standard. Jake To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message