Source-Changes archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: CVS commit: [jmcneill-pm] src/sys/arch/x86/x86



On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 09:59:05AM +0100, David Laight wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 02:48:21AM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 11:05:48PM +0100, David Laight wrote:
> > > On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 03:44:57PM +0000, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Module Name:    src
> > > > Committed By:   joerg
> > > > Date:           Sat Sep  8 15:44:57 UTC 2007
> > > > 
> > > > Modified Files:
> > > >         src/sys/arch/x86/x86 [jmcneill-pm]: cpu.c
> > > > 
> > > > Log Message:
> > > > ANSIfy before further changes.
> > > 
> > > Is this a good idea on a branch?
> > > When the branch is merged the branch-specific changes won't be visible
> > > - unless the same ANSIfication is done to HEAD separately.
> > 
> > I asked Andrew whether he has changes in this area so I don't expect
> > this to be a problem.
> 
> I wasn't thinking about problems merging other branches, but about the
> visibility of the actual changes in your branch.
> 
> It would probably be best to ansify head, and pullup that chagne into
> your branch. Then, when your branch is merged, the change to head is
> only the significant changes, not all the mechanical ones.

Actually applying the ansification to the head and adjusting the branch 
base (i.e. re-syncing w/ HEAD) will achive the same effect.

Take care,

Bill

Attachment: pgpgI64U3Zd2D.pgp
Description: PGP signature



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index