On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 07:19:55AM +, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote:
> > Log Message:
> > Enable Stack Smash Protection (SSP) by default for NetBSD/amd64 and
> > NetBSD/i386 as previously discussed on the "port-amd64" and
> > "port-i386" mailing lists. No objections from the core team.
>
> My
Hello,
> Module Name:src
> Committed By: tron
> Date: Wed Nov 11 16:35:45 UTC 2009
>
> Modified Files:
> src/share/mk: bsd.sys.mk bsd.x11.mk
>
> Log Message:
> Enable Stack Smash Protection (SSP) by default for NetBSD/amd64 and
> NetBSD/i386 as previously discussed on the
hi,
> Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote:
>
>> Module Name: src
>> Committed By:rmind
>> Date:Wed Nov 11 09:59:42 UTC 2009
>>
>> Modified Files:
>>
>> src/sys/fs/tmpfs: tmpfs_subr.c
>>
>> Log Message:
>>
>> Simplify tmpfs_itimes() and use vfs_timestamp(). [ ... ]
>
>
On Wednesday 11 November 2009 17:03:17 Christoph Egger wrote:
> Nick Hudson wrote:
> > Module Name:src
> > Committed By: skrll
> > Date: Wed Nov 11 16:08:32 UTC 2009
> >
> > Modified Files:
> > src/sys/arch/hp700/hp700: mainbus.c
> > src/sys/arch/hppa/hppa: pmap.
Nick Hudson wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: skrll
> Date: Wed Nov 11 16:08:32 UTC 2009
>
> Modified Files:
> src/sys/arch/hp700/hp700: mainbus.c
> src/sys/arch/hppa/hppa: pmap.c
> src/sys/arch/hppa/include: pmap.h
>
> Log Message:
> Use the new flags argument
Simon Burge wrote:
> >
> > Simplify tmpfs_itimes() and use vfs_timestamp(). [ ... ]
>
> Was changing from getnanotime() to effectively nanotime() (via
> vfs_timestamp()) deliberate? The original intention of using
> getnanotime() for filesystem timestamps was that having a "perfect"
> timestam
Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: rmind
> Date: Wed Nov 11 09:59:42 UTC 2009
>
> Modified Files:
>
> src/sys/fs/tmpfs: tmpfs_subr.c
>
> Log Message:
>
> Simplify tmpfs_itimes() and use vfs_timestamp(). [ ... ]
Was changing from getnanotime() to
