From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 19 19:09:10 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B54C616A4CE; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:09:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU [128.205.32.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6775243D49; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:09:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (kensmith@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i6JJ96TH015456; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:09:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from kensmith@localhost) by electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (8.12.10/8.12.9/Submit) id i6JJ95Iv015453; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:09:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:09:05 -0400 From: Ken Smith To: Gary Jennejohn Message-ID: <20040719190905.GA14666@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> References: <200407191334.47133.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <200407191740.i6JHeDNT006723@peedub.jennejohn.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200407191740.i6JHeDNT006723@peedub.jennejohn.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: Wilko Bulte Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i4b/layer1/ifpi2 i4b_ifpi2_pci.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:09:10 -0000 On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 07:40:13PM +0200, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > "Daniel O'Connor" writes: > > On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 05:58, Wilko Bulte wrote: > > > > Note that this does not close the PR since it was filed against 4.9. > > > > > > But that implies that the PR will be there forever? > > > > I'd say he means that when it's MFC'd (in 5 days like he said) the PR will be > > > > closed :) > > > > No, I think it means that I have to ask security-officer whether I can > commit the patch to 4.9 and 4.10 in addition to RELENG_4, but I'm not > 100% certain. I'm not really sure that s-o should care about this, since > it has no relevance to security. Unless it is a security hole being fixed you won't be able to apply the fix to 4.9. If the person who filed the PR absolutely needs the fix in 4.9 it would be up to them to retro-fit the patch to 4.9 themselves (if they didn't provide the patch to begin with...). With 4.10 being called an Errata Branch we could process this as an Errata item for 4.10 if you feel strongly that this is a bug a lot of people are being bitten by and there are no workarounds for it. If that is the case after this has been MFC-ed and in RELENG_4 for around two weeks you can send mail to re@ to request it be handled as an Errata item. Please note the "lots of people" and "no workaround" stuff - once the release is done the bar is fairly high on what we'll consider for Errata. -- Ken Smith - From there to here, from here to | kensmith@cse.buffalo.edu there, funny things are everywhere. | - Theodore Geisel |