Re: [patches] RFA: Use cross nm in NPTL tests

[Jim Blandy <jimb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 2/2/07, Jim Blandy <jimb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> If someone else has strong opinions, I'm definitely open on the
>> question.  It's not standard practice.  But in EGLIBC, because of our
>> intention to continue to track the FSF sources very closely, we
>> generally need to prioritize merging slightly above legibility
>> (although our first choise is obviously "both").
>
> Purely out of curiosity does svk's smerge handle this merge
> scenario correctly?

It's my understanding that the way SVK handles merging within an
individual file is pretty much the same as everyone else; the
sophistication is restricted to tracking which changes have been
merged from where.  So while we certainly need that kind of help, I
don't think it makes a difference here.