This patch (or an equivalent) is required to run some of the tests in
xfstests on busybox. I would really like to see this merged if it is
acceptable.
On Wed, 2014-10-01 at 16:55 +0300, Ari Sundholm wrote:
> This patch is still waiting for comments and review.
>
> On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 11:33 +030
On 31 October 2014 14:56, Ari Sundholm wrote:
> This patch (or an equivalent) is required to run some of the tests in
> xfstests on busybox. I would really like to see this merged if it is
> acceptable.
>
> On Wed, 2014-10-01 at 16:55 +0300, Ari Sundholm wrote:
>> This patch is still waiting for c
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Laurent Bercot
wrote:
> Le 19/10/2014 15:22, walter harms a écrit :
>>
>> I would vote for a busybox-next (or what you call it).
>> A branch that easly fold back into the main but contains all
>> the recent patches.
>
>
> That may be desirable indeed.
> However,
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Laurent Bercot
wrote:
>> Why? If Denis does not have time for the project, then we cannot
>> really blame him. On the other hand, if a fork could work better with
>> someone standing up, why not?
>
>
> Forking a project divides resources and weakens both children.
Guys, what is going on ??
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> Indeed, thanks, and sorry. ^^
>
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>
>> Laszlo,
>>
>> I think you meant the other Denys, the one with RedHat that maintains
>> busybox.
>> I'm with Texas Instru
Sad to see your monologue. :-(
For my money, it is not that bad, so it would be nice to get a
feedback from the ultimate maintainer. As far as I can see it is a
very serious hazard in busybox that you are trying to address
following my initial email.
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 2:24 PM, tito wrote:
Isaac,
I honestly took my time to address your concerns, but I have never
received any feedback. Please ... ?
Cheers, L.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Isaac Dunham wrote:
>>> On Mon
How about ... for instance merging this thing ... ?
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Isaac Dunham wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 03:06:08PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>> On Saturday 22 March 2014 23:46, Isaac Dunham wrote:
>> > On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 08:40:48PM +0100, Harald Becker wrote:
>>
Why? If Denis does not have time for the project, then we cannot
really blame him. On the other hand, if a fork could work better with
someone standing up, why not?
Forking a project divides resources and weakens both children. It is
a possibility for big projects with lots of resources and sev
Laszlo Papp wrote:
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Laurent Bercot
wrote:
But when the problem is finding a maintainer with
enough time, expertise and willingness to maintain a project, forking is
definitely not a solution - on the contrary, it would only exacerbate the
problem. You were strugg
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:52 PM, John Spencer
wrote:
> Laszlo Papp wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Laurent Bercot
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> But when the problem is finding a maintainer with
>>> enough time, expertise and willingness to maintain a project, forking is
>>> definitely not a sol
On Friday 31 October 2014 19:40:56 you wrote:
> Sad to see your monologue. :-(
>
> For my money, it is not that bad, so it would be nice to get a
> feedback from the ultimate maintainer. As far as I can see it is a
> very serious hazard in busybox that you are trying to address
> following my init
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 8:13 PM, tito wrote:
> On Friday 31 October 2014 19:40:56 you wrote:
>> Sad to see your monologue. :-(
>>
>> For my money, it is not that bad, so it would be nice to get a
>> feedback from the ultimate maintainer. As far as I can see it is a
>> very serious hazard in busybo
El 30/10/2014 16:30, "Isaac Dunham" escribió:
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 04:15:13PM +0100, Stam, Michel [FINT] wrote:
> > Hello Denys,
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean with every daemon?
> >
> > In this particular case, I did not see much from zcip, as it was being
executed from OpenWRT procd.
On Friday 31 October 2014 19:28:50 Laszlo Papp wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Laurent Bercot
> wrote:
> >> Why? If Denis does not have time for the project, then we cannot
> >> really blame him. On the other hand, if a fork could work better with
> >> someone standing up, why not?
> >
>
On Friday 31 October 2014 21:16:36 you wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 8:13 PM, tito wrote:
> > On Friday 31 October 2014 19:40:56 you wrote:
> >> Sad to see your monologue. :-(
> >>
> >> For my money, it is not that bad, so it would be nice to get a
> >> feedback from the ultimate maintainer. As
16 matches
Mail list logo