First something vaguely relevant.

	I think Darren's patch nicely clarifies the situation to make
	it very obvious what to expect form pipe(2). I'd like to see it
	committed.

	Now for the wasted bandwidth...

On 3 Oct 2001, Charles M. Hannum wrote:

> On Wed, 2001-10-03 at 16:26, Darren Reed wrote:
> > In some email I received from a luser, sie wrote
> > > On Wed, 2001-10-03 at 14:10, Darren Reed wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Comments on the the following change for pipe(2) ?
> > >
> > > Bill already took care of this.  `Go away.'
> >
> > The person who said that should just have not said anything.
> > There are a million and one other ways you could have said
> > that without being such a rude ass like that.
>
> Given how much effort you put into deriding people as "lazy" and
> "apathetic", you have *NO* moral ground to stand on.

	If you have an issue with something someone does, take it
	up when they do it, _not_ when they take the time to do
	something helpful like provide a patch. That's a hell of
	a way to encourage people to do the right thing.

-- 
		David/absolute		-- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --