8 Apr
2014
8 Apr
'14
3:42 p.m.
On 04/08/2014 07:28 AM, Martin Kletzander wrote:
I wanted to back-port 736e017e as requested in Bug 1058149 [1], because it fixes a crash. However, it requires 5b3492fa and e9d09fe1 to be back-ported as well, so I wanted to confirm it's still OK when it's not a simple two-liner or similar (and combined with the low probability of the crash to happen). What's the stand on this?
Martin
IMO both those commits look fine, I've backported large cleanups in the past to ease backporting bug fixes. Thanks, Cole