On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 09:40:03AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 09:20:39AM -0700, Juli Mallett wrote: > > Under half an hour of MFC time seems rather too quick. If this was > > being insta-MFC'd because of some kind of security concern, then it > > would be nice to have seen it signed off by SO, and treated like a > > security issue. > > It paniced several boxes at work, and I'm asking RE@ if its possible to > get into 9.1-R for some new deployments we'd like to do (and trying to > track stock FreeBSD for). Getting into stable/9 is a 1st requirement. > > [ I expect a "NO" from RE@, but I want to try and thus need to submit the > request with 'svn merged' patch. ]
This cannot be a valid reason for insta-MFC. Juli is absolutely right.
pgpcApjPA3EcX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
