Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 20:02:19 -0400 From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> To: juli mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> Cc: juli mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libufs Makefile Message-ID: <20050830200219.534e6d72@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20050828221142.GA71466@toxic.magnesium.net> References: <200508251022.j7PAMWFO030767@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050825195416.GA65980@toxic.magnesium.net> <20050826062242.734ffae4@localhost> <20050828221142.GA71466@toxic.magnesium.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 12:11:42 -1000 juli mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > * Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> [ Date: 2005-08-26 ] > [ w.r.t. Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libufs Makefile ] > > On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:54:16 -1000 > > juli mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > > > > * Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> [ Date: 2005-08-25 ] > > > [ w.r.t. cvs commit: src/lib/libufs Makefile ] > > > > trhodes 2005-08-25 10:22:30 UTC > > > > > > > > FreeBSD src repository > > > > > > > > Modified files: > > > > lib/libufs Makefile > > > > Log: > > > > Hook getino.3 up to the build and link it to putino.3. > > > > > > > > PR: 83820 > > > > > > This is wrong. As the PR states it was purposely not hooked up. > > > inode.c doesn't have functions which look like the interfaces > > > you've just published, and there isn't even a putino(3) in > > > there. If the cause of the confusion is the manpage being listed > > > in Xr's or something, then comment out the Xr's. This is very > > > obviously wrong, if you try to use what's in the manpage I > > > committed. Probably it shoudln't be in CVS at all. The reason I > > > put it there at the time is that it was ready and inode.c was > > > about ready to hit CVS, but that got dropped. Now, if you want > > > to help me remember what P4 tree that inode.c was in, and pick up > > > whereever I left off, that'd be awesome. > > > > Let me understand real quick, it was purposely not hooked up because > > it was the only file not updated? I mean, I can back this out, > > no problem; however, I fail to see why nothing is going on with > > this code. No clue on the branch, sorry. > > It was purposely not hooked up because the code that it documents > isn't in CVS. > I know now why it wasn't hooked up to the build. What I'm asking is: 1: Is this currently maintained? and 2: What utilities are currently using this? Need to leave but I'll back it out later on this evening when I return. -- Tom Rhodes
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050830200219.534e6d72>