Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 15:11:46 -0500 From: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it>, Xin LI <delphij@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: lost change 272451 - CAP_EVENT for tcpdump (Re: svn commit: r276788 - in head: contrib/tcpdump contrib/tcpdump/lbl contrib/tcpdump/missing usr.sbin/tcpdump/tcpdump Message-ID: <54D3CE82.2050204@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CA%2BhQ2%2BiDa4fn2bzbLk87Amp8aZxf1HJvEZ-T9vFwCuBFoPxvmQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CA%2BhQ2%2BiDa4fn2bzbLk87Amp8aZxf1HJvEZ-T9vFwCuBFoPxvmQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/05/15 13:30, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > Hi, > the update to tcpdump 4.6.2 also lost svn272451 and 272653 (addition of > CAP_EVENT to the capabilities given to tcpdump). > > Given this and the other bug fixed in 277638, I am not sure if there > are other local changes that have been lost in the merge. > Also I wonder whether there is something we should have done > differently when applying local changes to code in contrib/ to make > sure that the merge from vendor does not overwrite them ? > > cheers > luigi FWIW, I think what happened here is that upstream merged our capsicum changes only partially and the corresponding clash made it difficult to understand what came from where. If our local changes are too big and upstream is very active, this complexity is unavoidable but it is always good to try to upstream all that we can, and the tcpdump maintainers have been rather open to taking changes. Cheers, Pedro.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?54D3CE82.2050204>