On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Ed Day wrote:
> The patch is attached, further comments below.
Ah, I get it now! When you said, "The code that builds the command
should be modified to ensure the extension is present," I thought that
you meant that there was some problem with the build process.
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
[...]
> Hm. I worry that people will expect changes to the source buffer to
> appear after the source buffer is added. Ah well, we can fix that one
> with
appropriate documentation.
Sorry about that. I tend to compose several para
On Jun 11, 2011, at 12:28 AM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Nir Soffer wrote:
Hi,
I'm getting some random dns failures with versions from the last
week:
The failures are random - sometimes all the tests pass, sometimes
some of
the backends fail in the same place
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Nir Soffer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm getting some random dns failures with versions from the last week:
>
> The failures are random - sometimes all the tests pass, sometimes some of
> the backends fail in the same place, and sometimes all of them fail in the
> same place
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Joachim Bauch wrote:
Nice stuff; we're getting closer here.
> Am Mittwoch, den 08.06.2011, 13:15 -0400 schrieb Nick Mathewson:
>> Could we simplify stuff by also declaring that if you
>> have an evbuffer which is added by reference to another evbuffer, the
>> enti
