Revert "Fix memory protection default setting" #16122
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
IIUC, this reverts whole series from #16058. What is the schedule for v246? A quick fix would be reverting just the third commit. (Yeah, I'm not amused with the three-state logic neither, so I'll come up with something else. |
keszybz
added a commit
to keszybz/systemd
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 23, 2020
This reverts commit 53aa85a. The reason is that that patch changes the dbus api to be different than the types declared by introspection api. Replaces systemd#16122.
Member
|
A smaller revert is in #16122. Let's close this one.
We've been "just a week" from v246 for months now. I hope to wrap it up sooner rather than later. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Reverts #16058
Sorry for this, I misread #16058 before merging. I figure we should either revert this as it is now, or quickly merge a fixup patch that does away with the property type overloading.
@Werkov what's your take?