From owner-freebsd-current Tue Mar 7 17:57:28 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rpi.edu (mail.rpi.edu [128.113.100.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CBEC37B543 for ; Tue, 7 Mar 2000 17:57:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail.rpi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA329520; Tue, 7 Mar 2000 20:56:59 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <00Mar8.112037est.115267@border.alcanet.com.au> References: <200003072033.OAA00074@cs.rice.edu> <20000307152417.A86322@panzer.kdm.org> <20000307175207.C3611@industrial-strength.net> <00Mar8.112037est.115267@border.alcanet.com.au> Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 20:57:17 -0500 To: Peter Jeremy , Dan Potter From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: when is 4.0 up for release ? Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >On 2000-Mar-08 10:38:23 +1100, Dan Potter wrote: > > Has anyone thought about the problem I posted a few days ago > >(getcwd() breaks on unionfs in some conditions)? That seems like > >a pretty big problem to me... maybe not too many people use unionfs > >though, I don't know. There are some problems. I would be extremely surprised if 4.0-release were delayed until all known problems with unionfs are worked out. No one is against the idea of having them fixed, but as a practical matter the problems would take enough time to find, fix, and prove out that 4.0 should not be delayed that long. --- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or drosih@rpi.edu Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message