[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Several changes made to fts.c in Gnulib

From: Eric Blake
Subject: Re: Several changes made to fts.c in Gnulib
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 09:41:27 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1

On 07/27/2017 06:23 AM, James Youngman wrote:
> Looking at the patch, it looks not terribly burdensome to maintain
> "downtream" except for the possibility that some fts option could
> subsequently be introduced in gnulib which shares a value with
> Paul, since you don't plan to apply this patch upstream, do you have
> any suggestions for ensuring that we avoid collision or maintenance
> problems with the downstream patch?

As long as we maintain the patch in diff, then gnulib-tool will tell us
(any time we update git submodule for gnulib) whether we have to
regenerate the diff, at which point we can cater to a new option by
bumping our value for FTS_NOLEAF.  Here's an example of coreutils
storing its project-local diffs to upstream gnulib:

Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]