From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 12 23:23:29 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F4E437B401 for ; Mon, 12 May 2003 23:23:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8423A43F85 for ; Mon, 12 May 2003 23:23:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.12.8/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h4D6NRkA021819 for ; Tue, 13 May 2003 00:23:27 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 00:22:49 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20030513.002249.56047366.imp@bsdimp.com> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20030511232857.GB66670@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <20030509154304.GC61844@dragon.nuxi.com> <20030511.103412.15266142.imp@bsdimp.com> <20030511232857.GB66670@dragon.nuxi.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: `Hiding' libc symbols X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 06:23:29 -0000 In message: <20030511232857.GB66670@dragon.nuxi.com> "David O'Brien" writes: : On Sun, May 11, 2003 at 10:34:12AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: : > In message: <20030509154304.GC61844@dragon.nuxi.com> : > "David O'Brien" writes: : > : On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 01:20:28PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: : > : > At any rate, can we please put this thread to rest until : > : > Jacques comes back from vacation? It doesn't make sense : > : > arguing about it when the main proponent of it is not : > : > here. : > : : > : This thread doesn't make sense regardless of who is on vacation. Those : > : of us opposed to this change have shown enough opposition that there will : > : not be a consisenses on this issue. (at least not this go around) This : > : thread should just die period. : > : > No you haven't shown that opposition. You've just shown that you can : > be loud and not have a full command of the facts of the situation. We : > already hide some of the symbols. Geeze : : Geeze what are you talking about? You don't think there is opposition to : Jacques commit and anything like it? Do I need to list all the names of : us that didn't like the commit that started all this? So what if some : symbols are already hidden. I and other don't like that either -- but it : seems we have to tolerate that for a threading library. This is clearly a religious difference of opinion. Both sides are Right, which means progress is impossible. : "loud", "full command"... if you think there is or can be any consisenses : of this issue in the freebsd-arch@ list, you haven't been reading the : thread. Do you really think this issue can be settled in this forum : right now?? Geeze. I have been reading the thread. Near as I can tell, only you and ache were opposing things, but I must admit that I didn't count the people that I didn't think understood the issues in this list. Warner