From owner-freebsd-commit Wed Sep 6 03:38:40 1995 Return-Path: commit-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id DAA03635 for freebsd-commit-outgoing; Wed, 6 Sep 1995 03:38:40 -0700 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id DAA03615 for cvs-all-outgoing; Wed, 6 Sep 1995 03:38:37 -0700 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id DAA03599 for cvs-usrsbin-outgoing; Wed, 6 Sep 1995 03:38:36 -0700 Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.17]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id DAA03581 ; Wed, 6 Sep 1995 03:38:31 -0700 Received: from corbin.Root.COM (corbin [198.145.90.34]) by Root.COM (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA05149; Wed, 6 Sep 1995 03:37:25 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by corbin.Root.COM (8.6.11/8.6.5) with SMTP id DAA25614; Wed, 6 Sep 1995 03:39:22 -0700 Message-Id: <199509061039.DAA25614@corbin.Root.COM> To: CVS-commiters@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-usrsbin@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/mrouted/mtrace Makefile In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 06 Sep 95 03:34:21 PDT." <199509061034.DAA02491@freefall.freebsd.org> From: David Greenman Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM Date: Wed, 06 Sep 1995 03:39:22 -0700 Sender: commit-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >davidg 95/09/06 03:34:20 > > Branch: usr.sbin/mrouted RELENG_2_1_0 > usr.sbin/mrouted/mrinfo RELENG_2_1_0 > usr.sbin/mrouted/mrouted RELENG_2_1_0 > usr.sbin/mrouted/mtrace RELENG_2_1_0 > Modified: usr.sbin/mrouted Makefile Makefile.inc callout.c config.c > defs.h dvmrp.h igmp.c inet.c kern.c main.c > map-mbone.8 mapper.c mrinfo.8 mrinfo.c mrouted.8 > mrouted.conf mtrace.c prune.c prune.h route.c > route.h vif.c vif.h > usr.sbin/mrouted/mrinfo Makefile > usr.sbin/mrouted/mrouted Makefile > usr.sbin/mrouted/mtrace Makefile > Log: > Brought in changes from main branch: update to mrouted v3.6. > > Reviewed by: Bill Fenner , wollman Note that "Reviewed by" in this context means that I contact both Garrett and Bill and asked them for their thoughts on including this stuff in 2.1. Bill provided a detailed list of reasons why it should be included, and Garrett didn't object...so I mean to say that they both "reviewed" the decision. -DG