From: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>,
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Move SHA-1 implementation selection into a header file
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 19:48:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <512b2a2b-237b-1e73-5a85-1a19a796aa2b@ramsayjones.plus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqvarafs7j.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
On 15/03/17 15:57, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com> writes:
>
>> On 14/03/17 23:46, brian m. carlson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the SHA1_HEADER include is not defined in such a case, developers
>>>>> see spurious errors when using these tools. Furthermore, while using a
>>>>> macro as the argument to #include is permitted by C11, it isn't
>>>>> permitted by C89 and C99, and there are known implementations which
>>>>> reject it.
>>>>
>>
>>> Junio, do you want to amend the commit message before you merge it?
>>
>> Yes, please! ;-)
>
> If only you were a few hours quicker.
Oops, sorry. When I wrote that I didn't know it was already in 'next'.
[I tend not to reply to emails as soon as I read them (because it
often gets me into trouble!), but wait until I've read everything
in my inbox. Unfortunately, I get so much email, it can be hours
later before I respond ... (I keep saying that I will unsubscribe
from some mailing lists ;-) ).]
> Let me see how bad the fallout is to revert the merge to 'next' and
> merge an amended version in.
Hmm, I didn't intend to add to your workload! Is it worth the hassle?
In the great scheme of things, it's not a major issue. I dunno.
> I _think_ the whole "Furthermore" sentence can go, since nobody
> complained since cef661fc ("Add support for alternate SHA1 library
> implementations.", 2005-04-21) started using the Makefile construct.
Yep.
[BTW, I haven't finished reading everything in my inbox yet, hopefully
I won't get into trouble. :P ]
ATB,
Ramsay Jones
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-15 19:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-11 22:28 [RFC PATCH] Move SHA-1 implementation selection into a header file brian m. carlson
2017-03-12 13:01 ` Jeff King
2017-03-12 16:51 ` brian m. carlson
2017-03-12 20:12 ` Jeff King
2017-03-12 17:54 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-03-14 18:41 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-14 20:14 ` Jeff King
2017-03-14 20:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-03-14 21:26 ` Jeff King
2017-03-14 21:50 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-03-14 23:42 ` Ramsay Jones
2017-03-14 23:46 ` brian m. carlson
2017-03-15 0:15 ` Ramsay Jones
2017-03-15 15:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-03-15 19:48 ` Ramsay Jones [this message]
2017-03-14 21:56 ` Jonathan Nieder
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=512b2a2b-237b-1e73-5a85-1a19a796aa2b@ramsayjones.plus.com \
--to=ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).