On 01-Feb-2003 Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> I'm working on backing out david's patch.
>
> Part of his megacommit was a patch that should ahve been separatly
> handled.
>
> I have split it out..
> Can people have a look at it and see if it makes sense.
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/lock.diff
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Mike Barcroft wrote:
> Brad Knowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > At 6:27 PM -0800 2003/02/01, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> >
> > > Well, it is an active conversation/thread. Either people care enough
> > > to stay involved or they don't.
> >
> > But don't people
Brad Knowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 6:27 PM -0800 2003/02/01, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> > Well, it is an active conversation/thread. Either people care enough
> > to stay involved or they don't.
>
> But don't people have to sleep sometime? Shouldn't we allow for that?
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, Brad Knowles wrote:
>
> > At 10:47 AM -0800 2003/02/01, Julian Elischer wrote:
> >
> > > still no comments?
> > >
> > > this patch seems to be working, but a review from another developer
> > > would be good.. particular
At 6:27 PM -0800 2003/02/01, Matthew Dillon wrote:
Well, it is an active conversation/thread. Either people care enough
to stay involved or they don't.
But don't people have to sleep sometime? Shouldn't we allow for that?
I mean, I can understand impatience, too. I get impatient
On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 10:47 AM -0800 2003/02/01, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> > still no comments?
> >
> > this patch seems to be working, but a review from another developer
> > would be good.. particularly re: the point mentionned..
>
[...]
>
> If I am wrong an
:02:59:24 -0800 (PST). The date/time stamp on the message that I am
:replying to is Sat, 1 Feb 2003 10:47:44 -0800 (PST). That's
:something around seven hours and forty-five minutes, unless I have
:miscalculated.
:
: Is it really normal to expect replies within that kind of a time
:fra
At 10:47 AM -0800 2003/02/01, Julian Elischer wrote:
still no comments?
this patch seems to be working, but a review from another developer
would be good.. particularly re: the point mentionned..
You first announced the split-out patch at Sat, 1 Feb 2003
02:59:24 -0800 (PST). The date
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ju
lian Elischer writes:
>Oh shut up Poul-Henning.
Try to remain civil here Julian :-)
I tried to explain the situation to you, to make sure you would not be
tempted to do rush something which needs to take the time things take.
>I know I'm on your shit list, an
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ju
> lian Elischer writes:
>
> >still no comments?
>
> Julian, you sent this out a few hours ago, after people had spent
> a lot of time and getting quite frustrated trying to get you to
> DTRT with your mentee's ina
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ju
lian Elischer writes:
>still no comments?
Julian, you sent this out a few hours ago, after people had spent
a lot of time and getting quite frustrated trying to get you to
DTRT with your mentee's inappropriate commit.
If people are sick and tired of you right n
still no comments?
this patch seems to be working, but a review from another developer
would be good.. particularly re: the point mentionned..
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> I'm working on backing out david's patch.
>
> Part of his megacommit was a patch that should ahve been
I'm working on backing out david's patch.
Part of his megacommit was a patch that should ahve been separatly
handled.
I have split it out..
Can people have a look at it and see if it makes sense.
http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/lock.diff
basically locks need to be per thread but were per proces
13 matches
Mail list logo
