On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 6:51 PM, David Rees<[email protected]> wrote: > >> There are some foot shooting possibilities if you aren't careful. > > Any details on those? >
Binding to things that local services would bind to, and then those fail to start. > Hmm, if I just submit a patch which addresses #1931 and keeps > duplicate nc entries out of inetd.conf without adding new features > (which IMO is a bug), could that be accepted into the stable branch? > Yeah that would be acceptable. > Hate to say it, but I don't have a lot of interest in writing code for > a release whose release schedule appears to be many, many, months away > and I am not yet even testing in the lab. I am much more motivated to > write code which has a good chance of seeing production use relatively > soon. Anything that gets added to RELENG_1_2 must be added to 2.0 first. So you're going to have to accommodate 2.0 either way for it to be accepted. I don't know what your definition of "many, many months" is, but 2.0 isn't years out or anything, talking a few months to final release maybe, partially dependent on the FreeBSD 8.0 release schedule. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
