[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/9] libxl: spolit up libxl.c

Juergen Gross writes ("[PATCH 0/9] libxl: spolit up libxl.c"):
> Code movement only. No functional change intended.

This statement is not true because

> Juergen Gross (9):
>   libxl: adjust copyright comment of libxl.c

... that patch is not just code motion.

Can you please double-check, and explicitly enumerate the other
intentional changes ?  Obviously there is an intentional change to the
Makefile, and the copyright header is duplicated in each case.

Are there any other changes which are not precisely moving a block of
lines from libxl.c into other file(s), completely unchanged ?

Did you have to make any functions non-static ?


Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.