On 07-Oct-01 Terry Lambert wrote:
> As to the work itself, I have been avoiding it, since we have
> a new person at ClickArray whose "trial by fire" is building
> an updated "developer workstation release CDROM" based on the
> FreeBSD 4.3-RELEASE plus our heavily modified kernel code,
> and our d
Terry Lambert wrote:
>
> Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> >
> > Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > >
> > > > man send-pr
> > >
> > > Yeah; I'd prefer it if "send-pr" ran under Windows, or of
> > > FreeBSD would support WinModems.
> >
> > What fails to work for you i
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
>
> Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Steve Kargl wrote:
> > >
> > > man send-pr
> >
> > Yeah; I'd prefer it if "send-pr" ran under Windows, or of
> > FreeBSD would support WinModems.
>
> What fails to work for you in the Web Interface at
> http://www.FreeBSD.
Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Giorgos Keramidas writes:
> : Don't use attachments. MIME is evil. Copy/paste the patch in the
> : report. There are people out there that do not have MIME-aware MUA's
> : and you'll break the nice query-pr command that developers can use in
>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Giorgos Keramidas writes:
: Don't use attachments. MIME is evil. Copy/paste the patch in the
: report. There are people out there that do not have MIME-aware MUA's
: and you'll break the nice query-pr command that developers can use in
: freefall to read the entir
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Terry Lambert writes:
: NB: Other people have complained about this as well.
That's why I always use the web interface to deal with bugs... That
way the web server does the mailing, which seems to be much better at
getting into the databse.
Warner
To Unsubscribe:
Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The web interface doesn't allow for patches to be attached.
> http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=27653
[ Synopsis: Updates to send-pr.html to support MIME ]
Don't use attachments. MIME is evil. Copy/paste the patch in the
report. There are
On Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 01:45:37PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > It was posted to -current (see above).
> >
> > man send-pr
> >
> > A search of the GNATS databases with "terry" and "lambert"
> > returns zero hits. The freebsd-current mailing list is not
> > the preferre
Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve Kargl wrote:
> >
> > man send-pr
>
> Yeah; I'd prefer it if "send-pr" ran under Windows, or of
> FreeBSD would support WinModems.
What fails to work for you in the Web Interface at
http://www.FreeBSD.org/send-pr.html ?
-giorgos
To Unsubscribe:
Steve Kargl wrote:
> > It was posted to -current (see above).
>
> man send-pr
>
> A search of the GNATS databases with "terry" and "lambert"
> returns zero hits. The freebsd-current mailing list is not
> the preferred method for submission of patches and change
> requests.
Yeah; I'd prefer it
On Sun, Oct 07, 2001 at 12:13:50AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > Terry Lambert wrote:
>
> It was posted to -current (see above).
>
man send-pr
A search of the GNATS databases with "terry" and "lambert"
returns zero hits. The freebsd-current mailing list is not
the preferred method for submi
Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> The change is not undefended. It's been made very clear from the
> beginning that the security officer team sees the UUCP software as a
> security liability, and would like the software "relegated" to ports so
> as to limit the impact of vulnerabilities.
The specific probl
Kris Kennaway wrote:
> No, Terry, I didn't offer you carte blanche to "submit any change to
> FreeBSD and I'll commit it", I offered to commit your specific changes
> to an area of FreeBSD you were complaining about (registration of
> sysinstall distributions as packages), which I happened to agre
Peter Wemm wrote:
> Incidently, *knowingly* posting patches that are a year out of date do not
> look good for anybody. :-(
24 Apr 2001 was not a year ago.
I won't get into the "we don't use -current" argument again;
if you want the patches, take them. The diffs will apply
cleanly for the most
Peter Wemm wrote:
>
> Terry Lambert wrote:
> > Peter Wemm wrote:
> > > param.c was moved to kern/subr_param.c and is fully dynamic, and already
> > > has these changes.
> >
> > Nice to know that my changes previously posted to -current in
> > the 4.3 timeframe have been incorporated during the re
On Sat, 06 Oct 2001 12:15:23 MST, Terry Lambert wrote:
> I'm interested in the UUCP code only in so far as it is an
> unnecessary -- and so far, undefended by you -- change to
> code that's working fine for other people.
The change is not undefended. It's been made very clear from the
beginni
On Sat, Oct 06, 2001 at 12:15:23PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > You may recall that this isn't the first time I've tried to offer my
> > help in developing and committing your changes to an area of FreeBSD
> > which you've complained about -- although at least this time you
> > didn't just ign
Peter Wemm wrote:
> Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > If you're going to submit stuff, please at least do us the courtesy to ma
ke
> > > sure it is relative to recent source trees. This change was made quite s
om
> e
> > > time ago on both -current and RELENG_4.
> >
> > Yeah; I made it las
Terry Lambert wrote:
> Peter Wemm wrote:
> > param.c was moved to kern/subr_param.c and is fully dynamic, and already
> > has these changes.
>
> Nice to know that my changes previously posted to -current in
> the 4.3 timeframe have been incorporated during the rewrite.
BULLSHIT! They came from
Peter Wemm wrote:
> param.c was moved to kern/subr_param.c and is fully dynamic, and already
> has these changes.
Nice to know that my changes previously posted to -current in
the 4.3 timeframe have been incorporated during the rewrite.
Thanks!
> If you're going to submit stuff, please at least
Terry Lambert wrote:
> After that, you can commit the patches to /sys/conf/param.c to
> make maxfiles and maxfilesperproc tunable at boot time, and the
> patches to login.c to make it possible to rebadge the "login:"
> and "password:" prompts, and the patches to /sys/netinet/udp_usrreq.c
> to mak
I'm interested in the UUCP code only in so far as it is an
unnecessary -- and so far, undefended by you -- change to
code that's working fine for other people.
My interest in a hosting site would be first for a startup,
and second, to host a competitor to the FreeBSD development,
most likely base
22 matches
Mail list logo
