From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jan 14 13:28:41 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E423868
 for <questions@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:28:41 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from fbsd8@a1poweruser.com)
Received: from mail-03.name-services.com (mail-03.name-services.com
 [69.64.155.195]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1991C8A7
 for <questions@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:28:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.0.10.3] ([173.88.197.103]) by mail-03.name-services.com
 with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); 
 Mon, 14 Jan 2013 05:28:41 -0800
Message-ID: <50F40809.3020005@a1poweruser.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 08:28:41 -0500
From: Fbsd8 <fbsd8@a1poweruser.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org>
Subject: Re: sh script problem with capturing return code
References: <50EC9009.3030305@a1poweruser.com>
 <20130108224626.8c2d89cd.freebsd@edvax.de> <50EC99F2.3020404@a1poweruser.com>
 <44d2xevlhb.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> <50ED88CF.7060308@a1poweruser.com>
 <448v82unxb.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> <444niqum7n.fsf@lowell-desk.lan>
 <44zk0it6t5.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> <44r4ltu8zp.fsf@lowell-desk.lan>
 <CA+tpaK3xUAz_F+d02Qckkgb+m1bFdBVTMJ7tFp3RJ4z5e6988A@mail.gmail.com>
 <44libw8tiz.fsf@lowell-desk.lan>
In-Reply-To: <44libw8tiz.fsf@lowell-desk.lan>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jan 2013 13:28:41.0396 (UTC)
 FILETIME=[118C3740:01CDF25B]
X-Sender: fbsd8@a1poweruser.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: fbsd8@a1poweruser.com
X-EchoSenderHash: [fbsd8]-[a1poweruser*com]
Cc: Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com>,
 FreeBSD questions <questions@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:28:41 -0000

Lowell Gilbert wrote:
> Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Lowell Gilbert <
>> freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> I think it's a real bug, and the test cases don't cover "extra" elements
>>>> at all. Now I just have to figure out the right fix.
>>> I'm pretty sure that the fix is just to set rval on jumping to the
>>> "extra" tag in vwalk() in src/usr.sbin/mtree/verify.c.
>>>
>>> But my hot water heater just exploded, so I may not look at code for a
>>> few more days.
>>
>> I think they are importing NetBSD's updated mtree, perhaps already fixed
>> there.
> 
> It isn't. Which means I probably should submit fixes to multiple places.
> 
> Although NetBSD's changes seem fairly minor to me, from a quick look.
> The merge should not be difficult, no matter how it's approached.
> 
> 

Let me be sure I understand you correctly.
Your saying you tested the NetBSD version of mtree that was committed 
into 10.0 head and it also has the bug we found?