Carl A. Schmidt
carl at carlschmidt.net
Sat Sep 3 12:37:53 PDT 2005
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 09:31:09PM +0200, Simon Schubert wrote:
> On 03.09.2005, at 21:07, Carl A. Schmidt wrote:
> >I have started with one simple change from MAKE_KERBEROS5 to
> >making the option consistent with most of the other options. This
> >changes the logic of the Makefiles where MAKE_KERBEROS5 appeared to on
> >by default, but I also adjusted etc/defaults/make.conf to have
> >NO_KERBEROS by default. I don't know if that's the correct way to go
> >about disabling things by default or not, but it seemed to make sense.
> Thanks for your submission, but it won't work this way. if NO_KERBEROS
> is defined in /etc/defaults/make.conf, then you won't be able to
> undefine it lateron. While it would be good to have only one way of
> logic, this unfortunately doesn't work how you'd like it.
> >Also, what's the preference as far as patches go? Is it preferred to
> >have one big patch or multiple small patches? I suck at CVS so all I
> >could put together right now was small patches for each file modified,
> >and I expect this isn't what's preferred...
> Usually one big patch per changeset. cvs diff -u gives you the changes
> that you made before.
> If possible, please send patches with Content-Disposition: inline.
Hrm, okay. Well thanks for the response, I'll just have to try a
bit harder is all.
carl at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More information about the Submit