Re: [PATCH 0/3] update sha1dc

["Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 8:23 PM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
> <avarab@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This updates sha1dc fixing the issue on Cygwin introduced in 2.13.1,
>> and hopefully not regressing elsewhere. Liam, it would be much
>> appreciated if you could test this on SPARC.
>>
>> As before the "sha1dc: update from upstream" patch is what should
>> fast-track to master/maint and be in 2.13.2, the other two are the
>> cooking submodule use, that's all unchanged aside from of course the
>> submodule pointing to the same upstream commit as the code import
>> itself does.
>>
>> Junio: There's a whitespace change to sha1.h that am warns about, but
>> which it applies anyway that you didn't apply from my previous
>> patch. I think it probably makes sense to just take upstream's
>> whitespace shenanigans as-is instead of seeing that diff every time we
>> update. I guess we could also send them a pull request...
>
> I would suggest the pull request.

Looking at this again it's not a bug, just upstream choosing to indent
a comment with spaces, not a bug.

So it makes sense to just apply as-is so we don't have that diff with
them / different sha1s on the files etc.

> Also as to not make the mistake from before that I jump on the
> submodule bandwagon here:
> Patch 1 ought to go in its on series/patch, so with that out the way
> we have more time to consider the pros and cons of the rest of
> the series?

Yes it makes perfect sense to just take the 1st patch here and make
the submodule changes cook. This is just how I submitted it the last
time and Junio took the 1st patch into a maint topic, so I figured I'd
send it like this again.