[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic |
Date: |
Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:13:49 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: Andrea Arcangeli <address@hidden>
> On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 08:08:48AM -0700, Robert Anderson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 08:03, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > > The metadata only makes sense when you've something like arch or
> > > bitkeeper doing something useful with it
> > I'm not going to repeat for the Nth time why this is a patently false
> > statement. You can look it up.
> well, I don't pretend everybody to agree on this matter, [....]
Please drop it for now. Your reply makes it perfectly clear that you
have absolutely no clue what RWA has said to you so many times. Your
reply is basically non-responsive. I don't know or care to know the
reasons for this apparent communications bug. Hopefully we'll wind up
on the same page somewhere down the road and, if not, I think enough
effort has been spent trying to debug you on this issue. In the mean
time, please spare the list a continuation of this non-converging
thread and try to keep in mind that, perhaps, you don't really grok
these issues yet (i.e., try to stop repeating and propogating those
assertions that more experienced users have repeatedly tried to tell
you are based on fundamental misunderstandings).
-t
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, (continued)
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Miles Bader, 2003/10/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Paul Hedderly, 2003/10/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Miles Bader, 2003/10/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Charles Duffy, 2003/10/02
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Bruce Stephens, 2003/10/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Ollivier Robert, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Andrea Arcangeli, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Robert Anderson, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Andrea Arcangeli, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Robert Anderson, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic,
Tom Lord <=
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Bruce Stephens, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Andrea Arcangeli, 2003/10/03
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Bruce Stephens, 2003/10/03
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Tom Lord, 2003/10/02
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Linus Torvalds <address@hidden> Re: log-buf-len dynamic, Paul Hedderly, 2003/10/03