Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 19:52:33 +0000 From: "J. Mallett" <jmallett@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: "J. Mallett" <jmallett@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/xargs xargs.c Message-ID: <20020503195232.GD18506@FreeBSD.ORG> In-Reply-To: <20020504052140.T8741-100000@gamplex.bde.org> References: <20020502225801.GA10310@FreeBSD.ORG> <20020504052140.T8741-100000@gamplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 05:45:54AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2002, J. Mallett wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> Sorry to pick on you.
I don't mind Bruce.
> Perhaps a better example of messing with the vendor copyright string is in
> login/login.c. The string was first commented out and replaced by a
> quite different string generated by <sys/copyright.h>, and later the
> commented out code was removed. IMO, <sys/copyright> is only right for
> the kernel, but since it is only used in one place in the kernel, it
> shouldn't exist as a separate header. <sys/copyright.h> would be better
> if it added to existing copyright strings instead of replacing them.
>
> > 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,
>
> ITYM eqrel()/eqrel. Changing eqrel to eqrelval is OK, but I think you
> could find a better variable name. eqrelval is not a value; it is a
> code for the operator. The left and right operands are values; these
> are named vl and vr. The code also abuses vl to hold the result. (The
> result is a boolean (vl OP vr) where OP is the operand that is encoded
> by eqrelval.)
Yes, I do, sorry.
eqrelop?
--
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020503195232.GD18506>