On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 9:15 PM, Allan McRae <[email protected]> wrote: > On 23/07/13 11:27, Allan McRae wrote: >> On 22/07/13 11:09, Jason St. John wrote: >>> Unify the formatting of the --help switch for pacman utils. >>> All of the pacman utils will now output help text using the following >>> format: >>> >>> util-name (pacman) v<pacman version> >>> >>> one line description of util's purpose >>> >>> Usage: util-name [options] >>> >>> -b, --bar whatever --bar does >>> -f, --foo whatever --foo does >>> -h, --help display this help message >>> >>> Reported-by: Karol Błażewicz <[email protected]> >>> Signed-off-by: Jason St. John <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> This commit should address the issues raised by Karol Błażewicz in this >>> mail: >>> https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2013-June/017391.html >>> >> >> Looks fine. Query for everyone below: >> >>> src/util/cleanupdelta.c | 9 ++++----- >>> src/util/pacsort.c | 5 +++-- >>> src/util/pactree.c | 7 ++++--- >>> src/util/testdb.c | 12 +++++------- >>> src/util/testpkg.c | 6 +++--- >>> src/util/vercmp.c | 17 +++++++++-------- >>> 6 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/src/util/cleanupdelta.c b/src/util/cleanupdelta.c >>> index 4f34435..b13d770 100644 >>> --- a/src/util/cleanupdelta.c >>> +++ b/src/util/cleanupdelta.c >>> @@ -24,8 +24,6 @@ >>> #include <alpm.h> >>> #include <alpm_list.h> >>> >>> -#define BASENAME "cleanupdelta" >>> - >> >> It looks like we defined this in dea9b3bc when we stopped using basename >> to output the program name. Given it is only ever used in one place, >> is there any reason to keep it? > > Ping on this question. > > (and lesson for everyone - the more minimal your changes in a patch, the > more chance it gets accepted quickly...) > > >
Should I resubmit this with the BASENAME change done in a separate patch? Or should I resubmit with each file done in a separate patch? Jason
