From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [DIFFS] Re: Connection to emacs CVS broken ? Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 01:25:35 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87k5xi45h5.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <17913.45372.941749.353301@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <45F9C5E8.1010700@gnu.org> <87ps7am73r.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <17913.59348.720489.675967@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <87y7lxde4n.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87irczn5mo.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87slc3ekfs.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1174177488 4546 80.91.229.12 (18 Mar 2007 00:24:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 00:24:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juanma Barranquero , Chong Yidong , emacs-devel@gnu.org, Glenn Morris To: Andreas Schwab Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 18 01:24:44 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HSjCV-0003PR-Cj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Mar 2007 01:24:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HSjDn-0000Mw-8X for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 19:26:03 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HSjDi-0000Mr-SQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:25:58 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HSjDf-0000Ma-Th for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:25:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HSjDf-0000MX-Qd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 19:25:55 -0500 Original-Received: from pfepb.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.236]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HSjCN-00078u-3Z; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:24:35 -0400 Original-Received: from kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk (0x503e2644.bynxx19.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.62.38.68]) by pfepb.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 25CF2A50004; Sun, 18 Mar 2007 01:24:31 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Andreas Schwab's message of "Sun\, 18 Mar 2007 01\:01\:22 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.95 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:68036 Archived-At: Andreas Schwab writes: > storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > >> There's also a change to lisp-mode.el which looks a bit odd: >> >> *** ../latest/lisp/emacs-lisp/lisp-mode.el 2007-03-15 23:55:05.000000000 +0100 >> --- lisp/emacs-lisp/lisp-mode.el 2007-03-13 14:37:51.000000000 +0100 >> *************** >> *** 96,102 **** >> (regexp-opt >> '("defun" "defun*" "defsubst" "defmacro" >> "defadvice" "define-skeleton" >> ! "define-minor-mode" "define-global-minor-mode" >> "define-globalized-minor-mode" >> "define-derived-mode" "define-generic-mode" >> "define-compiler-macro" "define-modify-macro" >> --- 96,102 ---- >> (regexp-opt >> '("defun" "defun*" "defsubst" "defmacro" >> "defadvice" "define-skeleton" >> ! "define-minor-mode" "define-globalized-minor-mode" >> "define-globalized-minor-mode" >> "define-derived-mode" "define-generic-mode" >> "define-compiler-macro" "define-modify-macro" >> >> >> It looks plain wrong (it replaces define-global-minor-mode with >> define-globalized-minor-mode which is already in the list) > > I think you are looking at it in the wrong order: the first part is the > current version, which looks correct. The first part is the current version, the second one is the one that was in the repository just before the disk crash - so it is not in the wrong order. I agree that it looks like the second version is wrong and the first (current) is correct. So I wonder how the second version it ended up in my repository on 2007-03-13 -- unless someone committed that change on 2007-03-12 or 2007-03-13. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk