On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Skip Ford wrote: >> The following protocols are not updated for the new world order, and do not >> have a maintainer: >> >> netatm >> >> I will commit the changes to make netatm compile, but am pretty sure there >> will be socket reference problems. > > I've been working on bringing netatm into compliance with the new world > order. There are currently so many other problems with netatm, socket > reference problems aren't likely to cause much more of a headache for users. > :-) > > I have a list of half a dozen or so netatm panics prior to your changes, > without exercising much of code over just a few days. I've fixed two panics > locally, the rest still exist in my tree, and all are still in HEAD. > > I don't believe the version in the tree can even do the simplest of tasks. > My version at least has minimal functionality but I can still make it panic > within seconds. So, it's hard for me to believe anyone will notice when > it's disconnected from the build. That's not to say they won't miss it in a > release though. Ah, great. Please feel free to drop me (or Harti, or whomever) netatm patches to bring in. I will move ahead with disconnecting netatm (which primarily means not building it in LINT at this point), and merge my changes. Let me know if I can be of any use in working out issues in getting netatm updated with respect to the sockets side of the house. Robert N M WatsonReceived on Wed Mar 29 2006 - 16:12:02 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:54 UTC