From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 20 08:47:17 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 080C416A469; Wed, 20 Jun 2007 08:47:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from sippysoft.com (gk.360sip.com [72.236.70.226]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFD3D13C46E; Wed, 20 Jun 2007 08:47:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [192.168.1.47] ([204.244.149.125]) (authenticated bits=0) by sippysoft.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5K8lBGp071665 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 20 Jun 2007 01:47:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <4678E98D.3080905@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 01:47:09 -0700 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Sippy Software, Inc. User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (Windows/20070509) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <200706182249.l5IMnE4H099470@repoman.freebsd.org> <467863E0.2040906@FreeBSD.org> <20070619232125.GA750@rot13.obsecurity.org> <4678653B.8070409@FreeBSD.org> <20070619232451.GA872@rot13.obsecurity.org> <4678663E.2060204@FreeBSD.org> <20070620020138.GA2486@rot13.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20070620020138.GA2486@rot13.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-U; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, Pav Lucistnik , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/lib deps.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 08:47:17 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: > So the answer to my question is ... ? I'm still not sure you > understood it. If you are making no functional changes then the md5 > of the resulting binary will be unchanged, and this is in fact a good > way to check whether you are introducing functional changes or just > style/whitespace changes. Well, perhaps I did not make myself entirely clear. There were in fact some small functional changes (such as replacing fprintf(stderr...) with warnx() for consistency with the rest if the code and using abort(3) instead of exit(3) if sh.t happens) so that the checksum will not be the same. If you take a look at the patch it should be quite obvious what I am talking about. -Maxim