Re: useless if-before-free and no-semantic-change patches

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Vijay Bellur wrote:
> On 07/12/2012 12:52 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> In fact, while it's handy for review/rebase/regen to keep them in
>> separate c-sets, I'd be happy to merge the 6 automatically-induced
>> c-sets into one, if desired.  Let me know.
>
>
> I think it would be handy to have a single changeset as they are
> related in a broader sense.
>
>>
>> Also, for a change like this that is mostly stylistic,
>> (sort of like dead-code elimination), is it appropriate
>> to use the static-analysis BUG: number, or is there another one?
>>
>
> It might be a good idea to have a new bug for committing this patch set.

Sure.  I wrote this,
    http://bugzilla.redhat.com/839925
attached that BUG: number, merged the 6 commits into one
and resubmitted.



[Index of Archives]     [Gluster Users]     [Ceph Users]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux