Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 11:39:13 +0200 From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>, Ganbold <ganbold@micom.mng.net>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: libpthread compile failure Message-ID: <86odzpd1z2.fsf@xps.des.no> In-Reply-To: <442A510D.9060403@samsco.org> (Scott Long's message of "Wed, 29 Mar 2006 02:19:09 -0700") References: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0603282330150.21936-100000@sea.ntplx.net> <442A49FC.9050307@samsco.org> <86wtedd32u.fsf@xps.des.no> <442A510D.9060403@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> writes: > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > > Don't blame deischen, it was my mistake. > Sorry, I wasn't blaming Dan. I am a bit frustrated, though. At the > very least, when doing changes like you are doing, please send an > email to the lists telling people that the tree might be unstable for > a bit of time. The problem was that I made this change in the context of a larger patch, and didn't realize that committing it without also committing other parts of that larger patch would break the tree. I should have, though, and I should have tested it in a clean tree before committing. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86odzpd1z2.fsf>