There is a common spelling mistake in the Mozilla source -- 'depricated' is used instead of 'deprecated'.
confirming. Does this patch fix all occurences? If it does - then people might bother to give it a quick review. Also, it's convention to attach "diff -u" output, which is a bit easier for humans to read.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Summary: Spelling mistake - deprecated, not depricated → Common source comments spelling mistake - deprecated, not depricated
I attached a new patch in unified diff format. Yes, this patch does fix all the instances of the bug in the current CVS sources (I searched using `grep`). Thanks for the suggestions.
scott, I thought you'd like this one.
Assignee: asa → scc
Careless greps yield 11 files (14 changes) in patch. perhaps 22 (32 occurrences) in the mozilla tree? warnings: security/nss is locked, js might have special rules. general thought: when this is checked in, should we post to npm.<somethings> reminding people to correctly spell this word? I wonder if we should teach lxr about deprecated :-) I'd give an r= but i think i'll wait for other comments...
Assignee: scc → neilconway
Component: Browser-General → Tracking
Keywords: patch, review
QA Contact: doronr → scc
WRT: additional files: Woops, I must have missed some (does 'make -f client checkout' not checkout the entire tree?). I'll check that and upload a new patch when I get a chance (or else someone else can, it's not exactly rocket science ;-) ). Yeah, posting to n.p.m.? would probably be a good idea but I dunno which group would be the best. Thanks for the feedback.
I sent the following to the reporter a whlie ago, i'm reproducing it here because someone asked me to address this bug. unfortunately, i'm typing blindly, so i'm not going to make any edits, just paste: email@example.com wrote: > WRT: additional files: Woops, I must have missed some you might have, or they might not have been there... > does 'make -f client checkout' not checkout the entire tree? it does not. some parts of the tree (eg webtools) aren't necessary to mozilla browser development. > I'll check that and upload a new patch when I get a chance > (or else someone else can, it's not exactly rocket science ;-) ). but it's so much fun > Yeah, posting to n.p.m.? would probably be a good idea > but I dunno which group would be the best. hopefully someone will have ideas. > Thanks for the feedback. :-)
I just tried searching for depricated using LXR. There are a zillion occurences of MWJavaDoc_Proj_Depricated in macbuild xml files. Is it possible to do a global replace in Mozilla source replacing depricated with deprecated (since there are _so_ many occurences?
Merged with bug #106386
No longer blocks: 106386
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 11 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
Duplicate of bug: 106386
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.