From owner-freebsd-bugs Tue Jun 22 6:33:11 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from axl.noc.iafrica.com (axl.noc.iafrica.com [196.31.1.175]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A84614C15 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 1999 06:33:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sheldonh@axl.noc.iafrica.com) Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.noc.iafrica.com) by axl.noc.iafrica.com with local-esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 10wQfA-000Pgr-00; Tue, 22 Jun 1999 15:32:32 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn To: Tim Vanderhoek Cc: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/10131: bug in strptime(3) In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 22 Jun 1999 09:25:59 -0400." <19990622092559.A25678@ppp18341.on.bellglobal.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 15:32:32 +0200 Message-ID: <98756.930058352@axl.noc.iafrica.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 22 Jun 1999 09:25:59 -0400, Tim Vanderhoek wrote: > The only advantage to a uuencoded patch (as opposed to gziped and then > uuencoded) is that it prevents people from destroying tabs with stupid > cut and paste errors. Hey, you're preaching to the converted. I _prefer_ uuencoded patches (even shars and tarballs), since I just query-pr -F XXXX | uudecode. :-) The only reason I mention it is because I'm under the impression that the majority of committers prefer patches provided inline. I've just trying to make it easier for team-mates. But since I now know that there are at least 3 other active committers who have preferences similar to my own, I think I'll shush and let the rest speak for themselves. :-) Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message