There was some dismay about seeing a tarball at the workshop, even though
I promised to have better patches "in due course". Even though I can't
make those better patches yet, I can certainly make not so good patches
now.
In this directory,
/afs/umich.edu/user/m/d/mdw/build/openafs/patches/
find
openafs-20090621.tar.bz2
openafs-h20090621-m84-1-st.diff.bz2
openafs-h20090621-m84-2-r.diff.bz2
openafs-h20090621-m84-3-k5ssl.diff.bz2
openafs-h20090621-m84-4-rxk5.diff.bz2
openafs-h20090621-m84-5-other.diff.bz2
openafs-h20090621-m84-6-afskfw.diff.bz2
openafs-h20090621-m84-7-changed.diff.bz2
openafs-h20090621-m84-8-deleted.diff.bz2
result of applying these patches to the tarball
"cvs head 2009/06/21" should exactly match the m84 tarball.
in slightly more detail,
20090621.tar.bz2 it came from cvs
1-st whitespace (canonical tabs and trim trailing whitespace)
2-r remove register
3-k5ssl add k5ssl support
4-rxk5 add rxk5 security class
5-other other new files
6-afskfw move afskfw to here.
7-changed other file changes
8-deleted delete files that were moved or removed.
The whitespace & register patches are big but mindless.
k5ssl & rxk5 patches add complete directories containing
self-contained code. not much sense to dividing those further.
After that these patches become not so good.
These patches do have one property that might not be true
in later patch sets: all the intermediate versions should
be buildable, albeit with files that might not be useful.
-Marcus Watts
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
