Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 17 Feb 2003 01:51:20 +0300
From:      "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru>
To:        Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        Mark Murray <mark@grondar.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>
Subject:   Re: OPIE breakage: backout & patch for review
Message-ID:  <20030216225120.GA6374@nagual.pp.ru>
In-Reply-To: <20030216153951.A98564@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <20030216185426.GB52253@dragon.nuxi.com> <200302161911.h1GJBnaX034785@grimreaper.grondar.org> <20030216204847.GA5233@nagual.pp.ru> <20030216153951.A98564@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 15:39:51 -0600, Juli Mallett wrote:
> 
> Can you explain how this stops purely opieized apps from working?  I was
> under the impression the implicit case was still there, we just have a
> more explicit contract with the OPIE system.

This is not pure situation but mix with opiezed and opiezed+pamified apps
families contradiction. Each of the families will produce different
behaviour in the variant was commited initially by des (now he fix things
properly). If you tune opiezed+pamified apps to work as you need, pure
opizeded stops working and vice versa. I mean localhost handling.

-- 
Andrey A. Chernov
http://ache.pp.ru/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030216225120.GA6374>