2012/7/16 Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> > > On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 02:26:57AM +0200, Antonio Huete Jiménez wrote: > > I've pasted both new patches in this email with the intention of > > producing less traffic in the mailing list, but I'm unsure if this > > is the correct thing to do, opposed to sending one mail per patch. > > It's better to send one mail per patch. The reason for that is we > have automated tools that do the right thing with patches sent one per > e-mail. This includes patchwork (which tracks patches sent to the > mailing list; see > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-ext4/list/) and "git am". > > Just use the git send-email tool; it will do the right thing. I've used git send-email to send the patch that combines all BSDs into a single tag. > > > There are places where you are using #if defined(__DragonFly__) and > there are other places where you are using #ifdef DIOCGPART. Is there > a reason for this? I've used DIOCGPART because the rest of the code around uses DIOCGMEDIASIZE, DIOCGDINFO in a kind of sorted order, so I just copied the style. > > > In general, it's better to avoid using explicit feature tests rather > things like defined(__Dragonfly__) or defined(__solaris__). What if > an OS changes names or forks (i.e., like Open Solaris, Nextensa, > Illumos, etc.). > Same could happen to the DIOCGDINFO #ifdefs, no? > > And the combination of an #ifdef based on HAVE_SYS_DISKLABEL_H, > DIOCGPART, and defined(__DragonFly__) raises red flags that the > combinatorics may be very brittle in the long run. > Right but in some parts it is necessary to skip the code even if HAVE_SYS_DISKLABEL_H is defined. If you think there's a better way, just let me know and I'll change it righaway. > > Regards, > > - Ted Cheers, Antonio Huete -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
