Roland Mainz writes: > 1. Umpf... IMO we then end-up in a catch22 situation (or better: run in > circles forever - even the "proof of concept"-putback which should only > cover libc/libnsl/libsocket's DEBUG build is currently stuck in the > mud). I've tried lobbying for the change in the last couple of _months_ > without any success and the last hope is to get it "in" with the > compiler update. If we can't hijack that "compiler update"-boat then > I'll suggest to close the matching RFEs as "WONTFIX" (sorry for this > depressive conclusion but it seems we won't make any progress in the > forseeable future and I'm getting depressions... regardless what I try > nothing moves...).
"Lobbying?" Why not go through the normal path? Devise a fix, request a sponsor, get code reviews and testing, and then integrate. I agree with Peter Dennis; there's no good reason to accept yet more risk into his set of changes. I don't think that "lobbying" to attach the change to someone else's work or getting depressed over it is going to get the job done. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
