From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBB37DDE9E for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 03:00:16 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <2420E261-C9AB-49B8-8F99-C24C7A865044@kernel.crashing.org> From: Kumar Gala To: Stephen Rothwell In-Reply-To: <20071218060105.368f0bd4@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915) Subject: Re: Raising list size limit Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:54:15 -0600 References: <20071218143627.94f76142.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20071218060105.368f0bd4@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Cc: ppc-dev List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Dec 18, 2007, at 6:01 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:36:27 +1100 > Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am considering raising the limit on the size of postings to >> 400k. Does >> anyone have a real problem with this? Limiting message size was >> done to >> limit the damage of larges spams (and we don;t get very many of >> those on >> the list) and to ease the pain for people downloading emails over a >> slow >> (like dialup) link (and are there many of those left?). > > Fine by me! Do you really have patches that are 400k? - k