Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 09:55:45 -0700 From: Joe Kelsey <joek@mail.flyingcroc.net> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: "Matthew N. Dodd" <mdodd@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: /etc/libmap.conf MFC? Message-ID: <3EF73111.10209@mail.flyingcroc.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030621230622.36492B-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030621230622.36492B-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson wrote: > On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Matthew N. Dodd wrote: > > >>On Sat, 21 Jun 2003, Norikatsu Shigemura wrote: >>... >> >>>>"editing of shared libraries" problem I posted about earlier. It also >>>>does not seem like a real big deal to do an MFC for. >>> >>> That's good idea. I want this feature, too. >> >>You should upgrade to 5.1 if it has features that you want. >> >>Adding new features to the STABLE branch this late in its lifetime seems >>pointless. > > > 4.x will likely live on both in development and production for quite a > long time, and will therefore likely see MFC's of much larger things than > libmap.conf support. That said, if you're not willing to > backport/maintain it in 4.x, I agree that it will need to find an owner in > order to make it to 4.x :-). Maybe nork can step up to the plate? The step from ports committer to core committer seems large, but maybe not as large as going from non-committer. OTOH, I can (if necessary) come up with the steps necessary to commit this to -STABLE. I personally do not see why such a minor change should cause such a big deal. Add two files, apply extremely mionr changes to several others, done! /Joe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3EF73111.10209>