Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002 16:10:42 -0700 From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> To: obrien@FreeBSD.org Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, Alexander Kabaev <ak03@gte.com>, current@FreeBSD.org, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: i386 tinderbox failure Message-ID: <20021008231042.247562A88D@canning.wemm.org> In-Reply-To: <20021008224042.GA13880@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"David O'Brien" wrote: > On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 03:55:36PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > Could you please just commit this on the vendor branch if it is the > > vendor fix for now. Since the next vendor import will contain the > > fix you don't need to worry about maintaining the local patch so > > committing it onto the vendor branch is ok. > > Doing this screws up diffs to vendor source as there won't be a tag that > corisponds with this across all files. For small contribed things that > is OK. But when doing large ones it the following import+merge becomes > harder. While that is true, it usually isn't all that big a deal if you are careful and keep track of what you've done. It is certainly better than causing the file to leave the vendor branch for something you *know* is now in the vendor tree. And I think its better than leaving a known 'compiler crash' case there to bite developers. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021008231042.247562A88D>