[procps] Re: first part of nls
- From: Jim Warner <james.warner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: procps@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 08:20:54 -0600
On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:28 AM, Craig Small wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 03:49:01PM +0100, Sami Kerola wrote:
>> Here comes 101 first nls patches. All top nls work is out from this
>> pull request. The top patches are attached and I assume Jim will do
>> something like
> Just so its clear to me, did you want to wait for Jim to resolve
> conflicts then roll it in?
The patch Craig is holding is against his master branch.
It corrects things arising from the "Removed xalloc type functions from
library" commit.
It will not work against an nls version.
In my opinion, this should be the order:
1) Craig applies the top allocation patch to his master branch
2) Sami rebases his nls branch (there should be no conflicts) and does one last
forced push
3) Jim provides Sami with the top nls patches
4) Sami applies them to his nls branch
5) Craig then merges the nls branch
To merge first means that afterward, top would not have any nls support in
Craig's master whatsoever. That seems rather strange given top's contributions
to this effort.
Jim
Other related posts:
