From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Dec 13 10:42:45 2000 From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 13 10:42:44 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from earth.backplane.com (placeholder-dcat-1076843399.broadbandoffice.net [64.47.83.135]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF38237B402 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:42:43 -0800 (PST) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by earth.backplane.com (8.11.1/8.9.3) id eBDIgB984584; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:42:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:42:11 -0800 (PST) From: Matt Dillon Message-Id: <200012131842.eBDIgB984584@earth.backplane.com> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: objections to sbuf? References: Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :Any serious objections to committing the latest sbuf patch? : :DES :-- :Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org I won't object to you comitting it, but I think it's a huge waste of effort and space, not to mention introducing yet another MALLOC allocation which can potentially deadlock the system at a critical juncture. The kernel just doesn't have any sort of serious string handling problem that using snprintf() and strlcpy() couldn't fix in a second. -Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message