From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2B3320248 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 18:15:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727501AbfCKSP3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Mar 2019 14:15:29 -0400 Received: from wp156.webpack.hosteurope.de ([80.237.132.163]:55900 "EHLO wp156.webpack.hosteurope.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726977AbfCKSP3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Mar 2019 14:15:29 -0400 Received: from p5099125b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([80.153.18.91] helo=[192.168.100.43]); authenticated by wp156.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) id 1h3PSN-0005Tm-CN; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 19:15:23 +0100 Subject: Re: disabling sha1dc unaligned access, was Re: One failed self test on Fedora 29 To: Duy Nguyen , Jeff King Cc: Junio C Hamano , Jeffrey Walton , Todd Zullinger , Git List References: <20190308174343.GX31362@zaya.teonanacatl.net> <20190311033755.GB7087@sigill.intra.peff.net> From: Thomas Braun Message-ID: <8cf2fa6c-d742-a2a6-cde7-66cef87b04e8@virtuell-zuhause.de> Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 19:15:12 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;thomas.braun@virtuell-zuhause.de;1552328128;0b5c991f; X-HE-SMSGID: 1h3PSN-0005Tm-CN Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Am 11.03.2019 um 12:58 schrieb Duy Nguyen: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:48 AM Jeff King wrote: >> And AFAIK there is no good way to >> modify the submodule-provided content as part of the build. Why do we >> even have the submodule again? ;P > > Because of dogfooding of course. This is an interesting use case > though. I wonder if people often want to "patch" submodules like this > (and what we could do if that's the case) I usually do the following: - Fork the sub-project - Add a branch with my proposed patches - Update the URL and the commit of the submodule in the super-project This of course requires all users to do git submodule sync which is a bit incovenient, but works.