From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Shawn O. Pearce" Subject: Re: [PATCH, resent] fix openssl headers conflicting with custom SHA1 implementations Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 09:39:52 -0700 Message-ID: <20081001163952.GJ21310@spearce.org> References: <20080930203928.GN21310@spearce.org> <20080930205122.GO21310@spearce.org> <20081001034712.GE24513@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20081001155458.GF21310@spearce.org> <20081001160418.GA13917@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20081001161047.GG21310@spearce.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org To: Nicolas Pitre X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Oct 01 18:42:55 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Kl4lD-0007qh-Lo for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:41:12 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753244AbYJAQjx (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 12:39:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753251AbYJAQjx (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 12:39:53 -0400 Received: from george.spearce.org ([209.20.77.23]:35258 "EHLO george.spearce.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753244AbYJAQjx (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2008 12:39:53 -0400 Received: by george.spearce.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 58A903835F; Wed, 1 Oct 2008 16:39:52 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Wed, 1 Oct 2008, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > > Jeff King wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 08:54:58AM -0700, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > > > > > > > I think its easy enough to just rename our SHA_CTX and SHA_* > > > > functions to something more git specific. Since its mostly a global > > > > > > I think that is the cleanest and simplest solution. As for merging pain, > > > I think Junio would generally do a mechanical change like this as the > > > first thing after a release. However, in this case, I think we might > > > want it sooner if the conflict is causing breakage. > > > > Oh, yea, that's probably true. But with ARM broken according to > > Nico I'd almost just want this fixed in the upcoming 1.6.1 release. > > > Its simple enough to do. We can even do something like this during > > the transition period until right before the 1.6.1 final: > > Because it's easy to do then I'd do it sooner than later. Nico, are you going to write a patch for this? If not I'll do it myself later today or tomorrow morning. I don't mind doing it, I just don't want to duplicate work with you. I've got too much else going on to waste my time that way. Of course I'm wasting time on this email... ;-) -- Shawn.