Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 19:31:48 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Very imprecise watchdogd(8) timeout Message-ID: <97150.1316374308@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:30:28 -0400." <CACqU3MV7mLD1Qrsd3c0cK2hjffErhBqTVbQXHHQ62r6-pn8uMA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <CACqU3MV7mLD1Qrsd3c0cK2hjffErhBqTVbQXHHQ62r6-pn8uMA@mail.gmail.com> , Arnaud Lacombe writes: >>>I do not really care actually, but the manpage is wrong, and the code >>>needlessly complicated. >> >> As I said: Feel free to improve. >> >How can I expect anything to get through, when I cannot even get an >obvious use-after-free in the ipfw code fixed after months ? Or when >I've been waiting to play with Warner's external compiler support >patch for months ? Or when I can not get a build fix for 7-STABLE to >get committed ? [and the list goes on...] The oracle says: Try next answer. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?97150.1316374308>