From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Dec 13 13:43: 0 2000 From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 13 13:42:58 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mail.interware.hu (mail.interware.hu [195.70.32.130]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF62137B400 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 13:42:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from monrovia-11.budapest.interware.hu ([195.70.53.203] helo=elischer.org) by mail.interware.hu with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian)) id 146Jfl-0000LB-00; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:42:50 +0100 Sender: julian@FreeBSD.ORG Message-ID: <3A37ED35.8AC618D5@elischer.org> Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 13:42:13 -0800 From: Julian Elischer X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i386) X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matt Dillon Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: objections to sbuf? References: <200012131842.eBDIgB984584@earth.backplane.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Matt Dillon wrote: > > :Any serious objections to committing the latest sbuf patch? > : > :DES > :-- > :Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org > > I won't object to you comitting it, but I think it's a huge waste > of effort and space, not to mention introducing yet another MALLOC > allocation which can potentially deadlock the system at a critical > juncture. The kernel just doesn't have any sort of serious > string handling problem that using snprintf() and strlcpy() couldn't > fix in a second. What he said.. (I haven't see a glaring need for this yet... BTW I lost the URL to the new improved version...) > > -Matt > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message -- __--_|\ Julian Elischer / \ julian@elischer.org ( OZ ) World tour 2000 ---> X_.---._/ presently in: Budapest v To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message