Subject: Re: mbuf changes underway ? did I miss a brief ?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/19/2001 10:25:02
email@example.com ("Jason R Thorpe") writes:
> I guess you haven't been paying attention to my socket buffer thread.
So, this is the three-message thread on tech-net under the subject
"Socket buffer optimization tweak"?
I didn't see anything there -- i just grepped -- that related to:
> Deprecate the "m_act" alias of "m_nextpkt" (m_act is a historical
> name), and just use m_nextpkt everywhere.
(indeed, the diffs that you posted there continued to use m_act...)
Actually, i grepped messages in the lists:
tech-crypto tech-embed tech-kern tech-misc tech-net tech-ports
tech-security tech-smp tech-toolchain tech-userlevel
for the last month (mmm, news server), and saw no references to m_act
except those in your diff posting (which kept them), in your commit
message, and in Darren's question.
Did I miss something? It doesn't seem right to chide somebody for
"not following along" when they ask a question about a change that,
at least as far as I can tell _really wasn't ever mentioned_.
I don't rule out the possibility that i'm somehow missing some
tech-net posts, esp. if they were made yesterday (internet
connectivity in general seemed ... lacking yesterday, and maybe
they're in a queue somewhere)...