cvs commit: src/sys/contrib/dev/acpica acconfig.h acenv.h acfreebsd.h acgcc.h acpi.h acpiosxf.h acpixf.h acutils.h dbcmds.c dbxface.c exfldio.c exsystem.c hwsleep.c psparse.c rscreate.c tbget.c utglobal.c

[John Baldwin]

On 01-May-2003 Nate Lawson wrote:
> On Thu, 1 May 2003, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>> On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 02:35:16PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
>> > 
>> > >   Modified files:
>> > >     sys/contrib/dev/acpica acconfig.h acenv.h acfreebsd.h acgcc.h 
>> > >                            acpi.h acpiosxf.h acpixf.h acutils.h 
>> > >                            dbcmds.c dbxface.c exfldio.c exsystem.c 
>> > >                            hwsleep.c psparse.c rscreate.c tbget.c 
>> > >                            utglobal.c 
>> > 
>> > This hunk looks bogus as it didn't change during the Intel import:
>> *snip*
>> > Without this change make kernel-depend of LINT gives a _lot_ of
>> > warnings.  LINT also doesn't compile, but this is at least a
>> > good first step.
>> 
>> The question: do people think we should try to get another ACPI
>> snapshot in (provided we have someone willing to do it) and thus
>> try to get it fixed the "official" way or are we ok with changing
>> contrib'd code in this case and revert to the vendor branch when
>> we do upgrade sometime after 5.1?
> 
> I've been told that it's not possible to put files back on the vendor
> branch after 5.0 since it breaks cvs -D.  I would have liked to put a lot
> of the files back on due to the fact that they haven't had local changes
> for quite a few drops.
> 
> That being said, I'm willing to spend time fixing the 0228 dist but am not
> going to have enough time to roll another in May.  If someone else would
> like to take this up, it would be nice.

I might be able to do the next one since I've learned a bit more
about how these imports work.

-- 

John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org>  <><  http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve!"  -  http://www.FreeBSD.org/