From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Apr 23 13:21:23 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from implode.root.com (root.com [209.102.106.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24D8537BA0F; Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:21:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dg@implode.root.com) Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by implode.root.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA06740; Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200004232018.NAA06740@implode.root.com> To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linux emulation scripting fix to be committed to 5.x and 4.x wednesday In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 23 Apr 2000 12:01:46 PDT." <200004231901.MAA63381@apollo.backplane.com> From: David Greenman Reply-To: dg@root.com Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:18:26 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I do not consider the linux scripting patch to be a major infrastructure > change, I consider it to be a simple bug fix. If you have a functional > issue with the patch I'm all ears. If you disagree with my assessment of > the triviality of the linux scripting patch, then I will ask for a > second opinion from someone who is not quite so jaded in regards to my > commits... say Jordan or DG. I'm sure you're right that the impact is minor. I'm a little uncomfortable with immediate MFC's, even though I've been guilty of doing that myself at times in the past. Can we perhaps compromise and allow for a one day delay? At least that would catch glaring mistakes like mis-applied patches that happen sometimes even with highly skilled developers who have only the best intentions. -DG David Greenman Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org Creator of high-performance Internet servers - http://www.terasolutions.com Pave the road of life with opportunities. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message