Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Malone writes:
> >I noticed the following while looking through the M_ZERO patches.
> >When you were cleaning up some dev stuff you made the following
> >change to labpc.c (revision 1.33):
> >
> >
> > labpcs = malloc(NLABPC * sizeof(struct ctlr *), M_DEVBUF, M_NOWAIT);
> > if (labpcs)
> > {
> > bzero(labpcs, NLABPC * sizeof(struct ctlr *));
> > return 1;
> > }
> >+ cdevsw_add(&labpc_cdevsw);
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> >This seems to only do the cdevsw_add if the malloc failed. I presume
> >this is the opposit of the intended sense. I'll fix it up if you also
> >think it looks wrong.
>
> If nobody have noticed in "17 months, 2 weeks ago" (as cvs-web says)
> that labpc doesn't work, the labpc driver should be killed, not fixed.
>
> Objections ?
What you are saying is that people who may be using this driver have
not yet moved up to -current or 4.x and as such should not be allowed
to?
I see no harm in leaving it there..
leave that axe right where it is....
>
> --
> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
--
__--_|\ Julian Elischer
/ \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
( OZ ) World tour 2000
---> X_.---._/ presently in: Budapest
v
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
