From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750735AbWDDQQf (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:16:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750737AbWDDQQf (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:16:35 -0400 Received: from wohnheim.fh-wedel.de ([213.39.233.138]:7884 "EHLO wohnheim.fh-wedel.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750735AbWDDQQf (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:16:35 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 18:16:27 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn?= Engel To: Richard Purdie Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/testing] Upgrade the zlib_inflate library code to a recent version Message-ID: <20060404161627.GH25130@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> References: <1144163888.6441.48.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060404153354.GD25130@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <1144166212.6441.57.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1144166212.6441.57.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 4 April 2006 16:56:51 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 17:33 +0200, Jörn Engel wrote: > > On Tue, 4 April 2006 16:18:08 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > > > Upgrade the zlib_inflate implementation in the kernel from a patched > > > version 1.1.3 to a patched 1.2.3. > > > > s/1.1.3/1.1.4/ > > > > I once pulled all the bugfixes between the versions into the kernel. > > That's not what the header says :) Well, the complete patch from 1.1.3 to 1.1.4 was rather big. Every single copyright line got updated to a current date, without any other changes in those files. I found it rather silly and took the bugfixes only. ;) > > > +#if 0 > > > +int zlib_inflatePrime(z_streamp strm, int bits, int value) > > > > Was this code dead in 1.2.3 as well? > > This code was commented out in the kernel by Adrian Bunk as it has no > users and I just followed that example when updating I'm sure if > someone needed it, it could be enabled. My thinking was rather that we could remove it. #if 0 has an advantage in case you made a mistake - easy to revert. But after a while... > > > +#ifndef PKZIP_BUG_WORKAROUND > > > > For the kernel, we can remove compat code against DOS compilers, etc. > > In this particular case, I believe we can just consider data > > compressed with PKZIP to be illegal and throw an error. > > Agreed, there are places it can be tidied up a bit further. I was trying > not to make too many changes so any future updates against zlib are > easier. Fair enough. Jörn -- Data expands to fill the space available for storage. -- Parkinson's Law