Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:34:53 -0500 From: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> To: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@freebsd.org> Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r277878 - head/contrib/amd/hlfsd Message-ID: <CAPyFy2DocbmryFSTREE_XpAfJUi9eEsFvZAk8nrn2OZL=eXqnA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <54CA58BD.4090701@FreeBSD.org> References: <201501291533.t0TFX6Gp081562@svn.freebsd.org> <CAPyFy2AwVTLrOj1pceuyHE_a9jqZBGTRnkskT2_C1xzQ-Nw1bg@mail.gmail.com> <54CA58BD.4090701@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 29 January 2015 at 10:58, Pedro Giffuni <pfg@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> Reverting this sort of change shouldn't be necessary, where the change >> is trivial and identical to the one on the vendor branch. The net >> result would be the same after the merge from the vendor branch is >> done. > > The upstream version touches a couple more files and I will also > want to merge it to stable to fix the warnings with modern gcc. Ok. Everything would still work fine either way (although you'd have to specify both the original r277841 and the vendor merge for the MFC). I'm not really concerned with the revert + merge from vendor, it's just that avoiding it makes for slightly cleaner history. Also, if someone tries a search for eligible MFC revisions I think r277841+r277878 will show up.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPyFy2DocbmryFSTREE_XpAfJUi9eEsFvZAk8nrn2OZL=eXqnA>