Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:30:28 -0400 From: Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Very imprecise watchdogd(8) timeout Message-ID: <CACqU3MV7mLD1Qrsd3c0cK2hjffErhBqTVbQXHHQ62r6-pn8uMA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <45558.1316240251@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <CACqU3MVF5MwqeC%2Bs9VKk4mLJenmoS9Q_bJWkbYeFzaBFjo67gQ@mail.gmail.com> <45558.1316240251@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:17 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote: > In message <CACqU3MVF5MwqeC+s9VKk4mLJenmoS9Q_bJWkbYeFzaBFjo67gQ@mail.gmail.com> > , Arnaud Lacombe writes: > >>I do not really care actually, but the manpage is wrong, and the code >>needlessly complicated. > > As I said: Feel free to improve. > How can I expect anything to get through, when I cannot even get an obvious use-after-free in the ipfw code fixed after months ? Or when I've been waiting to play with Warner's external compiler support patch for months ? Or when I can not get a build fix for 7-STABLE to get committed ? [and the list goes on...] ? Thanks, - Arnaud
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACqU3MV7mLD1Qrsd3c0cK2hjffErhBqTVbQXHHQ62r6-pn8uMA>