From owner-cvs-all Thu May 2 15:55:15 2002 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from finntroll.newgold.net (durham-ar1-4-64-252-019.durham.dsl-verizon.net [4.64.252.19]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F98837B423 for ; Thu, 2 May 2002 15:55:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 64 invoked by uid 1001); 2 May 2002 22:58:01 -0000 Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 22:58:01 +0000 From: "J. Mallett" To: Bruce Evans Cc: "J. Mallett" , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/xargs xargs.c Message-ID: <20020502225801.GA10310@FreeBSD.ORG> References: <200205020521.g425LZF87064@freefall.freebsd.org> <20020503072052.B5240-100000@gamplex.bde.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020503072052.B5240-100000@gamplex.bde.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i Organisation: The FreeBSD Project Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 07:30:44AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Wed, 1 May 2002, J. Mallett wrote: > > > jmallett 2002/05/01 22:21:35 PDT > > > > Modified files: > > usr.bin/xargs xargs.c > > Log: > > __COPYRIGHT() and __SCCSID(). > > These should never be used. They create conflicts for future imports > and enlarge diffs with the vendor version by editing vendor lines, > and using __COPYRIGHT demonstrates a bug in its implementation: Sorry about this. I'll back out SCCSID and COPYRIGHT usage here, as well as m4(1), tomorrow. Thank you for pointing it out. The tabs/lack-thereof in SCCSID in m4(1) were due to me mis-using copy/paste in my editor vs. in my terminal. I'm going to be reverting the expanded keywords and their use (rcsid/sccsid/copyright) to how they are on the vendor branch to reduce diffs. Again, sorry, and again, thanks to you and Mike Barcroft for telling me this is wrong. I don't mind something that's going to make m4 updating easier in the future by any means. Speaking of the updates in m4, one of them related to... int getreql() { int getreql; ... Because of the shadowing. Changes like that are legitimate right? As it is, in my grepping for malloc use last night, I found at least one of us a variable: unsigned long malloc; But that's another set of questions entirely. Thanks again. -- jmallett@FreeBSD.org | C, MIPS, POSIX, UNIX, BSD, IRC Geek. http://www.FreeBSD.org | The Power to Serve "I've never tried to give my life meaning by demeaning you." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message