From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 21 13:33:28 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6FB916A468 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 13:33:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 443E413C469 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 13:33:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (zohwns@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l5LDXLEk085663; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:33:27 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id l5LDXKcl085662; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:33:20 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from olli) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:33:20 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <200706211333.l5LDXKcl085662@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, 000.fbsd@quip.cz, Kurt Buff , Jo Rhett In-Reply-To: <4679A3BE.9000807@quip.cz> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-stable User-Agent: tin/1.8.2-20060425 ("Shillay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:33:27 +0200 (CEST) Cc: Subject: Re: how much beer do I need to get this patch applied? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, 000.fbsd@quip.cz, Kurt Buff , Jo Rhett List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 13:33:28 -0000 Miroslav Lachman wrote: > I think that topic is not about "how we can do it another way", but why > this patch was not commited. This patch doesn't change current behavior, > but allows operator to choose another behavior. > Allowing more choices is always good thing, so I am for commiting this > patch. I agree completely. The point of this patch is to add an option (remember: options are optional ;-) and the default is off, i.e, no change in behaviour. So those who don't like the new option don't have to do anything, and nothing will change. Those for whom the new option is useful will enable it. Everybody happy, right? I also vote for committing the patch. (Personally I will probably also enable that new option. I prefer to be notified only if something does _not_ work. YMMV, of course.) Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd PI: int f[9814],b,c=9814,g,i;long a=1e4,d,e,h; main(){for(;b=c,c-=14;i=printf("%04d",e+d/a),e=d%a) while(g=--b*2)d=h*b+a*(i?f[b]:a/5),h=d/--g,f[b]=d%g;}