From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 11 14:02:19 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42C2A16A4CE; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:02:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from omoikane.mb.skyweb.ca (64-42-246-34.mb.skyweb.ca [64.42.246.34]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B01043D67; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:02:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mark@skyweb.ca) Received: by omoikane.mb.skyweb.ca (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 5985561D52; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:02:17 -0500 (CDT) From: Mark Johnston To: Ruslan Ermilov Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:02:17 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.1 References: <200408102228.39276.mjohnston@skyweb.ca> <20040811063509.GC80234@ip.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <20040811063509.GC80234@ip.net.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200408110902.17081.mjohnston@skyweb.ca> cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs-src summary for August 2-9 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:02:19 -0000 Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 10:28:39PM -0500, Mark Johnston wrote: > > Cryptography in releases and legal concerns > > ------------------------------------------- > > > > Nate Lawson (njl) moved the crypto distribution into base, making all > > releases cryptography-enabled. He noted, "The -DNOCRYPT build option > > still exists for anyone who really wants to build non-cryptographic > > binaries [ . . . ]." > > It was Colin Percival who did the change. Argh! My apologies to Colin - I still can't figure out how I managed to do that. > > mbuf exhaustion panic fixed > > --------------------------- > > Brian Feldman (green) changed the UMA (uniform memory access) code, > > UMA stands for the Universal Memory Allocator. Ah, thanks. I had only heard of UMA as part of the term "NUMA", and I was extrapolating from that, but actually looking up what NUMA is shows "uniform memory access" to be clearly not something you'd write special code for. For anyone who shared my confusion, "non-uniform memory access" is when some memory is slower than other memory, like in a clustered system. "Uniform memory access", where all access is the same speed, is obviously the normal case. For those who just use the Web page, I'm going to correct these errors in the published summary. I'm not trying to pretend I don't screw up, but I think the technical accuracy of what's on the Web is more important than preserving a record there of everything that was said. If this surprises or upsets you, please feel free to use the -current Web archives to continue to refer to the original version of the summary, including errors. Mark