From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 1 23:01:13 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1561D16A4CE; Fri, 1 Apr 2005 23:01:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from nixil.net (nixil.net [161.58.222.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58A0A43D46; Fri, 1 Apr 2005 23:01:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oz@nixil.net) Received: from [10.20.12.64] (fw.oremut02.us.wh.verio.net [198.65.168.24]) (authenticated bits=0) by nixil.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j31N18Qt020691; Fri, 1 Apr 2005 16:01:12 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <424DD28E.9040000@nixil.net> Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:00:30 -0700 From: Phil Oleson User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050323) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Matthew N. Dodd" References: <4244AC9C.7010803@nixil.net> <20050326030927.GA86483@xor.obsecurity.org> <424CAF89.60209@nixil.net> <20050331233821.Q328@sasami.jurai.net> In-Reply-To: <20050331233821.Q328@sasami.jurai.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.5.6 (nixil.net [161.58.222.1]); Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:01:12 -0700 (MST) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.82/762/Sun Mar 13 16:35:33 2005 on nixil.net X-Virus-Status: Clean cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: request: libedit sync X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 23:01:13 -0000 Matthew N. Dodd wrote: > On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Phil Oleson wrote: > >> btw, I was a bit unsure if I should increment 'SHLIB_MAJOR' to 5. >> There were some small changes (exposed some tok_xx functions) but it >> also removed el_data_get() & el_data_set(). blah.. > > > el_data_{get,set}() were local changes. It would be really nice if > they stayed. > hmm.. that was a detail I overlooked. I have not been able to track down where these functions are used. Can you assist with that? These calls could be changed to use el_get(el, EL_CLIENTDATA, data) && el_set(el, EL_CLIENTDATA, data), and we could eliminate these non-portable local changes. Phil