Patch list for getting the v3-2-test and v3-2-stable back in sync

Gerald (Jerry) Carter jerry at
Wed Apr 30 15:06:47 GMT 2008

Hash: SHA1

So is everyone in agreement to pull out the *original*
"revert" list?

My only reason for pushing this is that the longer we
wait the higher a chance that a new bug fix that we want
to ship will cause a conflict with the reverts that we
need to do.

cheers, jerry

Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> Karolin Seeger wrote:
>> Hi Jerry,
>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 03:49:04PM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
>>> I've gone through and created a set of proposed patches
>>> that will bring the v3-2- -test and -stable trees back in
>>> line with each other.  At
>> thank you very much! :-) 
> ...
>> There are some patches at the merge list which I would 
>> like to see on the revert list instead. We decided to
>> pick only bug fixes, segfaults and regressions for
>> 3.2.0rc1 and on the list are e.g. raised debug levels,
>> fixed typos and things like that. Here is a list of 
>> patches I would like to revert in v3-2-test instead
>> of merging them to v3-2-stable:
>> -0004-Remove-hard-coded-sizes.patch
>> -0007-Add-in-a-nice-big-comment-explaining-why-SamLogonEx.patch
>> -0011-Fix-some-ignoring-asprintf-result-warnings.patch
>> -0013-increase-log-level-for-this-failed-setsockopt-call.patch
>> -0015-fix-some-extrasemi-compile-warnings.patch
>> -0017-errors-add-WERR_INVALID_DOMAINNAME.patch (?)
>> -0018-vfs_cacheprime-fix-C-warning-make-implicit-cast.patch
>> -0020-rpc_parse-fix-assignment-discards-qualifier-warni.patch
>> -0023-Remove-two-pointless-else-branches.patch
>> -0025-Fix-typo.patch
>> -0026-loadparm-reformat-fix-whitespace-tab.patch
>> -0027-Strip-whitespace-in-ntsvcs-rpc-server.patch
>> -0028-init_srv_share_info_ctr-Add-debug-messages.patch
>> -0029-Fix-an-uninitialized-variable-warning.patch
>> -0036-rpcclient-Add-getdispinfoidx-command.patch
>> -0037-rpcclient-Add-tiny-fix-for-cmd_samr_get_dispinfo_id.patch
>> -0038-srv_winreg-add-a-debug-message-to-_winreg_CreateKey.patch
>> -0040-configure-fix-a-comment-typo.patch
>> -0041-docs-fix-indentation-in-expand-smbxonfdoc.patch
>> -0043-Fix-a-nested-extern-declaration-warning.patch
>> Do you agree?
> Hey Karalinn,
> My reasoning for including these (after a brief read
> over the patch $UBJECT line) is that I expect we would
> probably take them for 3.2.1.  So if we revert them now,
> we'll just have to re-add them later.  I believe all are
> low risk, but the actual patch authors should comment.
> I realize they don't meet the must-have-criteria we
> agreed on but with the late branch, we just have to figure
> out the best way to bring -stable and -test back in line.
> Not that I have not done integration testing with that
> complete patch list to -stable.  Only a compile test I
> believe.
> cheers, jerry

- --
Samba                                    -------
Likewise Software          ---------
"What man is a man who does not make the world better?"      --Balian
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


More information about the samba-technical mailing list