From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27522 invoked by alias); 27 May 2004 05:29:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 27493 invoked from network); 27 May 2004 05:29:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail1.panix.com) (166.84.1.72) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 27 May 2004 05:29:56 -0000 Received: from panix5.panix.com (panix5.panix.com [166.84.1.5]) by mail1.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CFA94871B; Thu, 27 May 2004 01:29:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from kingdon@localhost) by panix5.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixN1.1) id i4R5Ttk14843; Thu, 27 May 2004 01:29:55 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 05:29:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200405270529.i4R5Ttk14843@panix5.panix.com> From: Jim Kingdon To: mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca Cc: xconq7@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: (mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca) Subject: Re: Wrecking as a result of starvation References: X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg00426.txt.bz2 > At present, units that starve to death simply vanish. I would > prefer that they wreck (when wrecking is possible) instead. I haven't read the patch, but this idea sounds good to me. I'm not aware of any reason why wrecking would be wrong.