Hi David, On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 03:18:25AM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Wed, 2010-12-22 at 00:20 +0100, Samuel Ortiz wrote: > > The patch looks mostly fine, but I think we should also wake sleeping > > threads from pacrunner_proxy_set_direct(). > > Oh crap, yes. > > I thought along those lines for pacrunner_proxy_set_manual(), which is > actually OK because we do it in pacrunner_proxy_enable(). I didn't then > check that pacrunner_proxy_set_direct() was the same. > > Sorry about that. No problem. I applied and pushed your 4 patches, thanks for fixing that race.
Cheers, Samuel. -- Intel Open Source Technology Centre http://oss.intel.com/ _______________________________________________ connman mailing list [email protected] http://lists.connman.net/listinfo/connman
