From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23534 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2004 19:32:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-hacker-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-hacker-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 23503 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2004 19:32:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO palrel11.hp.com) (156.153.255.246) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 12 Nov 2004 19:32:44 -0000 Received: from hplms2.hpl.hp.com (hplms2.hpl.hp.com [15.0.152.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by palrel11.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEA681BA20; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:32:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from napali.hpl.hp.com (napali.hpl.hp.com [15.4.89.123]) by hplms2.hpl.hp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/HPL-PA Hub) with ESMTP id iACJWfTI015713; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:32:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from napali.hpl.hp.com (napali [127.0.0.1]) by napali.hpl.hp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Debian-16) with ESMTP id iACJWfpG010927; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:32:41 -0800 Received: (from davidm@localhost) by napali.hpl.hp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id iACJWfWH010924; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:32:41 -0800 From: David Mosberger MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16789.4057.112711.279151@napali.hpl.hp.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:32:00 -0000 To: Roland McGrath Cc: davidm@hpl.hp.com, libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: second thoughts on using dl_iterate_phdr() for cache-validation In-Reply-To: <200411112224.iABMOe0K017564@magilla.sf.frob.com> References: <16787.999.696416.486337@napali.hpl.hp.com> <200411112224.iABMOe0K017564@magilla.sf.frob.com> Reply-To: davidm@hpl.hp.com X-URL: http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/David_Mosberger/ X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00035.txt.bz2 >>>>> On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:24:40 -0800, Roland McGrath said: >> That's a bit disappointing. Earlier you said: Roland> If there is a complete, desireable, and working new Roland> interface ready to go in, there is no "opening date" for it. >> Is the attached patch falling short of being complete, desireable, and >> working? Roland> There is indeed no set "opening date". There is, however, a Roland> daily judgement on what kind of thing to be putting into the Roland> tree this week. For this week, it's no new interfaces and Roland> just bug fixes. In fact, I won't have time even to fully Roland> review your patch this week. Ah, ok, that doesn't sound like a problem. I certainly don't expect instant reviews. If it takes a few days or a week or two, that's certainly fine. Just let me know if you find any issues with the patch. Thanks, --david