From owner-freebsd-current Fri Apr 11 15:50:13 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA26925 for current-outgoing; Fri, 11 Apr 1997 15:50:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA26918 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 1997 15:50:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id PAA12512; Fri, 11 Apr 1997 15:29:42 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199704112229.PAA12512@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: WHY? ...non-use of TAILQ macros... To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 15:29:42 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, phk@dk.tfs.com, current@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <19057.860797750@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Apr 11, 97 03:29:10 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > I don't have another 10M for another checked out tree, unless I want > > Buy a disk! ;-) Or you could just integrate the patches and I could quit carrying them around. It would save me the cost of another disk and a hell of a lot of wasted integration time, and it would save you the email I send about it... and free me up to work on other things, like queue macro patches. Sounds like a win-win situation. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.