svn commit: r254966 - stable/9/usr.sbin

[Glen Barber]

On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:29:28AM -0700, Devin Teske wrote:
> 
> On Aug 27, 2013, at 11:27 AM, Glen Barber wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 06:16:50PM +0000, Devin Teske wrote:
> >> Author: dteske
> >> Date: Tue Aug 27 18:16:50 2013
> >> New Revision: 254966
> >> URL: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/254966&k=%2FbkpAUdJWZuiTILCq%2FFnQg%3D%3D%0A&r=Mrjs6vR4%2Faj2Ns9%2FssHJjg%3D%3D%0A&m=liaz95fhD2jvIKdlVPU7U5L5wSUmvhBIn55r4kCXnMQ%3D%0A&s=c379f1e4272fc0b90042e434234eaeb4a6ec9a169fefc38babe82b5556cdd358
> >> 
> >> Log:
> >>  Add missing mergeinfo from head for stabe/9 revisions: 252995 253168 253169
> >> 
> >> Modified:
> >> Directory Properties:
> >>  stable/9/usr.sbin/   (props changed)
> >>  stable/9/usr.sbin/Makefile   (props changed)
> >>  stable/9/usr.sbin/bsdconfig/   (props changed)
> > 
> > This is wrong.  usr.sbin should never be a merge target.  The correct
> > merge targets in this case are usr.sbin/bsdconfig/share and
> > usr.sbin/bsdconfig.
> > 
> 
> But but...
> 
> (first... apologies)
> 
> For clarification...
> 
> How exactly would someone merge the mergeinfo for the usr.sbin/Makefile?
> 
> In a separate commit? That seems (not arguing... but...) seems counter-intuitive
> to require so much churn for a touch-up.
> 
> Despite the fact that the commit was done in usr.sbin...
> 
> The *merges* were actually done at the right level.

You are right.  Sorry for the noise.  I misread the commit list
referenced in the log.

Glen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-stable-9/attachments/20130827/0aef440c/attachment.sig>