From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Apr 11 15:50:13 1997
Return-Path: <owner-current>
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 <current@freebsd.org>; 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 <terry@lambert.org>
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.