Hello, On 2009 m. June 20 d., Saturday 22:40:06 you wrote: > On Sat, 20 Jun 2009, Modestas Vainius wrote: > > On 2009 m. June 18 d., Thursday 21:10:24 you wrote: > > > So if you can add some docs and make that part optional as a second > > > patch on top of the first one, it will really help. > > > > So it is done. Both patches are attached. > > > > 0001 - tags without subst stuff + dpkg-gensymbols.1 update + a couple of > > changes logged in changes.diff > > 0002 - subst stuff on top of 0001. > > I merged the first patch and did some cleanup on top of it.
+ if ($sym->{deprecated}) {
# Bump deprecated if the symbol is optional.
- $info->{deprecated} = $minver if ($info->is_optional());
- } elsif (vercmp($minver, $info->{minver}) > 0) {
- $info->{deprecated} = $minver;
+ # XXX: Why?
+ $sym->{deprecated} = $minver if $sym->is_optional();
+ } elsif (vercmp($minver, $sym->{minver}) > 0) {
+ $sym->{deprecated} = $minver;
Answering to your "Why": this way it will keep reappearing in the diff each
new revision. That serves as a reminder for the maintainer to either remove
this #MISSING line or readd the symbol. And here it is another use case:
g++ no longer generates a template instantiation after switching to 4.4. That
optional symbol will start appearing as MISSING in the diff and I apply the
patch (that's like saying to yourself that the symbol is probably gone). Since
the developer/maintainer has no control over that symbol, I will probably want
to wait a bit more before completely getting rid of it. Its continuous
appearance in the diff allows me to track the symbol status (in the build
logs) and after a couple of rebuilds or g++ updates when I finally see that it
is really gone, I will remove the #MISSING line. This is all for information
purposes.
Drop that code line if you do not agree with this.
> Please file a
> new wishlist bug with your second patch only (updated if necessary).
Will do.
--
Modestas Vainius <[email protected]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
