From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 1 14:48:26 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3682537B405; Thu, 1 May 2003 14:48:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.bayarea.net [209.128.86.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C980843FCB; Thu, 1 May 2003 14:48:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from athlon.pn.xcllnt.net (athlon.pn.xcllnt.net [192.168.4.3]) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h41LmLwk065445; Thu, 1 May 2003 14:48:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@piii.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: from athlon.pn.xcllnt.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by athlon.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h41LmLg1060574; Thu, 1 May 2003 14:48:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: (from marcel@localhost) by athlon.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h41LmLMM060562; Thu, 1 May 2003 14:48:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 14:48:21 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar To: John Baldwin Message-ID: <20030501214821.GB16132@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: Nate Lawson Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/contrib/dev/acpica acconfig.h acenv.h acfreebsd.h acgcc.h acpi.h acpiosxf.h acpixf.h acutils.h dbcmds.c dbxface.c exfldio.c exsystem.c hwsleep.c psparse.c rscreate.c tbget.c utglobal.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 21:48:26 -0000 On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 04:45:37PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > >> The question: do people think we should try to get another ACPI > >> snapshot in (provided we have someone willing to do it) and thus > >> try to get it fixed the "official" way or are we ok with changing > >> contrib'd code in this case and revert to the vendor branch when > >> we do upgrade sometime after 5.1? > > > > I've been told that it's not possible to put files back on the vendor > > branch after 5.0 since it breaks cvs -D. I would have liked to put a lot > > of the files back on due to the fact that they haven't had local changes > > for quite a few drops. > > > > That being said, I'm willing to spend time fixing the 0228 dist but am not > > going to have enough time to roll another in May. If someone else would > > like to take this up, it would be nice. > > I might be able to do the next one since I've learned a bit more > about how these imports work. I just sent mail to acpi-jp@jp. with two patches. Both address the same problem. The first is large(r) and tested. The second is a one-liner but untested. We'll see... FYI, -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net