From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 13 18:12:55 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48F8516A400 for ; Sun, 13 May 2007 18:12:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.208.78.105]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D9AE13C480 for ; Sun, 13 May 2007 18:12:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost.apl.washington.edu [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4DI9D93065943; Sun, 13 May 2007 11:09:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.1/8.13.8/Submit) id l4DI9Dne065942; Sun, 13 May 2007 11:09:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 11:09:12 -0700 From: Steve Kargl To: Mark Linimon Message-ID: <20070513180912.GA65902@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <20070513175425.GA64710@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20070513180506.GA9171@soaustin.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070513180506.GA9171@soaustin.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Process for requesting reverting patch? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 18:12:55 -0000 On Sun, May 13, 2007 at 01:05:06PM -0500, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Sun, May 13, 2007 at 10:54:25AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=112408 > > Well, you've done the right thing by sending a PR and having it assigned > to the maintainer. Have you not heard anything back from mp@? > Of course, not! Rendering the debugger useless with the default shell would seem to be a critical bug to me, but somehow/one decided that the severity was non-critical. -- Steve