From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 4 21:46:04 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22D7237B401; Sun, 4 May 2003 21:46:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (12-233-57-131.client.attbi.com [12.233.57.131]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E87C43FAF; Sun, 4 May 2003 21:46:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.9/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h454k2dN005054; Sun, 4 May 2003 21:46:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: (from das@localhost) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.9/8.12.5/Submit) id h454k1BH005053; Sun, 4 May 2003 21:46:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 21:46:01 -0700 From: David Schultz To: Murray Stokely Message-ID: <20030505044601.GA4947@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Mail-Followup-To: Murray Stokely , src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org References: <200305042135.h44LZfXW092536@repoman.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200305042135.h44LZfXW092536@repoman.freebsd.org> cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libutil login.conf.5 X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 04:46:04 -0000 On Sun, May 04, 2003, Murray Stokely wrote: > murray 2003/05/04 14:35:41 PDT > > FreeBSD src repository > > Modified files: > lib/libutil login.conf.5 > Log: > Note that the idletime setting is not enforced. This is redundant in -CURRENT; nothing in the section under which idletime appears is implemented at all, as the section header explains. ache@ wanted them to remain in the manpage for reasons I don't recall, and putting in the text, ``[These] are not implemented in the base system'' was a compromise.