Yes. It should be inherited.
For the property values, I'd prefer:
standard - we honor the standard (posix) semantics, without saying
posix.
always - make every system call synchronous.
barrier - treat fsync() only as a write barrier, which ensures that
all previous
writes/updates will
On 4/2/10 2:12 PM, James Carlson wrote:
Peter Dennis wrote:
This FastTrack will EOF the Sip Express Router (SER) and its web based
interface -- SERWeb -- from Solaris Next and obsolete SER and SERWeb in
Solaris 10.
On November 4th 2008 a new SIP Router project was announced
On 4/2/10 2:44 PM, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
James Carlson wrote:
Peter Dennis wrote:
This FastTrack will EOF the Sip Express Router (SER) and its web based
interface -- SERWeb -- from Solaris Next and obsolete SER and SERWeb
in Solaris 10.
On November 4th 2008 a new SIP Router project was
in ksh93 non-special builtin binding is done via PATH search
by maniplating the PATH a non-privileged user can insert dirs
ahead of the builtin binding dir -- so it just becomes a problem
of setting up the PATH dir order to suit individual needs,
even to the point of bypassing all non-special
On 4/2/10 4:21 PM, James Carlson wrote:
Lukas Rovensky wrote:
On 4/2/10 2:44 PM, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
James Carlson wrote:
Why does removal from OpenSolaris necessarily follow an announcement
like that?
As a user of SER, I would agree with that.
By as a user of SER -- do you mean a
Shawn Walker wrote:
I asked if the *first* package (libxcb) *required* the second package
(xcb-util). It was already clear the second required the first.
However, your reply below seems to indicate the first package does not
require the second.
If the first package required the second, and
Stefan,
I am good with most of the responses. I want to delve a little more into
the first issue.
Thanks,
John
On 04/ 2/10 08:43 AM, Stefan Teleman wrote:
John Fischer wrote:
Stefan,
Thanks for being thorough as usual.
I have truncated the fast track below for the issues/concerns
that I
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 11:53:33AM +0100, Alan Maguire wrote:
[...]. I think adding the following
set of probes to the original proposal should hopefully
address shortcomings in this area in a manner
consistent with the connect-* and accept-* probes:
tcp:::close-request
hi Nico
On 02/04/2010 17:48, Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 11:53:33AM +0100, Alan Maguire wrote:
[...]. I think adding the following
set of probes to the original proposal should hopefully
address shortcomings in this area in a manner
consistent with the
