On 29/05/2016 13:17, Cy Schubert wrote:
In message <574b2eac.3010...@freebsd.org>, Pedro Giffuni writes:
On 29/05/2016 12:37, Cy Schubert wrote:
In message <201605291618.u4tgitnj024...@repo.freebsd.org>, "Pedro F.
Giffuni" w
rites:
Author: pfg
Date: Sun May 29 16:18:55 2016
New Revision: 300961
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/300961
Log:
one-true-awk: replace 0 with NULL for pointers
Also remove a redundant semicolon.
Submitted upstream already.
Modified:
vendor/one-true-awk/dist/b.c
vendor/one-true-awk/dist/lex.c
vendor/one-true-awk/dist/maketab.c
vendor/one-true-awk/dist/parse.c
vendor/one-true-awk/dist/run.c
vendor/one-true-awk/dist/tran.c
Was this commit and r300962 obtained from the upline or vendor or were
these commits local to FreeBSD only?
There is no public awk public repository AFAICT, but bwk acknowledged
the submission.
The change to openresolv was merged to the public repository.
As they've acknowledged the submissions, can you please tag the new
versions of awk and openresolve with the correct upstream version numbers,
please?
That's an impossible request as there are no "correct upstream version
numbers".
In the case of openresolv, I included the repository revision, but
checksums have
no chronological sense and should be avoided for tags.
In this case using tags for anything other than official releases would
be a mess.
As stated in our subversion primer (5.4.4):
"Vendor patches should be committed to the vendor branch, and merged
from there to head. If the patch addresses an issue in a new release
that is currently being imported, it /must not/ be committed along with
the new release: the release must be imported and tagged first, then the
patch can be applied and committed. There is no need to re-tag the
vendor sources after committing the patch."
Pedro.
_______________________________________________
svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
