Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes:
> : Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : > Attached is a patch that attempts to work around recent stdio
> : > breakage in -current.  I've verified it compiles, but won't be
> : > able to test it until at least tomorrow.  If someone wants to
> : > review it and verify it works, I'll commit it.
> : 
> : Please. Let's not, and say we did.
> I'd rather see this patch, or something similar, than bump the major
> version again.  We can phase in a better way to obviate the need to do
> this in the future.

Personally, I think we place far too much weight on the major number thing.
I think we should be allowed to bump it when the alternative is 'major pain'
to developers.

I also object to hacking around like this.  I would far prefer that we fix
it properly.  We *need* to be able to innovate, especially with locking in
libc in 5.x.  I suspect we will have major events like this several more
times before 5.0-R when we add in hooks for KSE or rfork threading.


Lets commit that and get on with life.  Existing binaries will just keep
on running.

And if we dont ship libc.so.5, in 5.0-R, then *so what*?


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to