[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: cvs problems on 1998 Sep 7 current
> From: Tobias Weingartner <email@example.com>
> I believe that union mount was broken in 2.3, or at least partially broken.
> I also believe that not a lot of people were using it. That being said,
> most (if not all) developers use a disk to do development from, not some
> union mount. There has been talk of using a union mount by some developers
> more often, thereby causing the code in question to be kept more up-to-date.
It is the documented technique on both the web site and the printed CD
> 1) I could go in, and change the web pages, but that would take effort. The
> effort of remembering to change them back (or update them yet again) when
> someone finally fixes the problems.
Good enough, since it won't be "fixed" until the next CD.
> That being said, nobody is paying me anything for my work on OpenBSD. If you
> want to pay me to fix your problems, I'm sure we can work out an arrangement.
> I'd love to get paid to work on OpenBSD.
If you would pay _me_ to find the problems....
> Also, a quick search and check on the errata.html page, shows a patch availabe
> for 2.3, and an explanation of the unionfs problem.
Wow, great (but I already knew that). And that showed up immediately in
the printed CD liner notes and on the source web page?
(that was sarcasm)
Thanks, you've been helpful in the past. But I always try to give very
detailed problem reports, and am getting pretty tired of the overall
attitude of the responses.
Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32