On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 08:56:40AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 17:37 +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 08:30:32AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > systemd "216-9" is not built from 216 at all, it is in fact systemd-217 > > > > Why the misleading version number? > > There is a comment in the spec: > > # This is really closer to 217 than to 216, and it is easier to revert a few > # patches then to carry all the other patches after 216. > > and a changelog note: > > - Pull more changes from upstream, including post-217 bugfixes. This > is now a bastard mix of systemd-216 and systemd-217, with some of > the important changes in systemd 217 still reverted: > readahead removal, timedatectl change, fq_codel as default, > job timeouts for init and poweroff, multi-seat-x removal, > coredumps from watchdog timeouts. > > For the record, systemd-216-8 had ~588 patches. > > I think the intent is that 216-8 and 216-9 be more or less the same > codebase but arrived at in different ways, but in practice there seems > to be a noticeable difference. > > The diff I came up with is: > > https://www.happyassassin.net/temp/systemd-2168-2169.diff This diffs autogenerated content. It also contains a rename of functions to add mac_ prefixes to selinux functions. And a rename to hashmap functions in preparation of for implementation changes which were done post 217 (and are not part of this update). It is also done without -M, so catches some renames as significant changes. I'm frankly puzzled about the point of this exercise. Zbyszek -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
