On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) <mtk.manpa...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Kay Sievers <k...@vrfy.org> wrote:
>> Before: >> syslog(SYSLOG_ACTION_SIZE_UNREAD, 0, 0) = 286965 >> syslog(SYSLOG_ACTION_READ_CLEAR, "<12>"..., 1000000) = 24000 >> syslog(SYSLOG_ACTION_SIZE_UNREAD, 0, 0) = 286965 >> >> After: >> syslog(SYSLOG_ACTION_SIZE_UNREAD, 0, 0) = 90402 >> syslog(SYSLOG_ACTION_READ_CLEAR, "<5>"..., 1000000) = 90402 >> syslog(SYSLOG_ACTION_SIZE_UNREAD, 0, 0) = 0 > I'm going to call my report yesterday bogus. Somewhere along the way, > I got confused while testing something, and my statement about 2.6.31 > behavior is wrong: the 2.6.31 and 3.5 behaviors are the same. As such, > your patch is unneeded. Sorry for wasting your time. I think you have been right with your report. The above pasted before/after from the patch commit text is actually a result of real testing with current git. And your initial description sounds right, and the patch seems to produce the expected results here. I just confused the numbers in your report and wrongly parsed 2.6 > 3.6. Hmm, at least do far we did not blame anybody else than ourselves as confused. One of us at least is right, and it looks you have been, and I also think the patch is at least intended to be right. :) Kay -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
