So I couldn't hold myself. :)
Here are 3 more patches (against the CVS snapshot of ~13:00 New York
* muse-size_t.patch: This one fixes gcc warnings and quite possibly
some undesired behavior on certain systems (x86_64 etc.) where size_t
!= unsigned int
* muse-gcc44.patch: This will make muse compilable against gcc-4.4
* muse-fix-some-compilation-warnings.patch: Well, as the name says, it
fixes some of the compilation warnings.
The first two are important and I think that they must be committed.
The last one fixes very trivial warnings and not applying it will
probably not break anything any time soon.
I made the patches in the above order but I believe that they can be
applied in any order.
Great to see things rolling along here :)
Feels like the real 1.0 is not that far away!
As someone requested I'll try to update the news page in the recent future.
As for the patches, Tim, I'd be eternally grateful if you could take
responsibility to check them in. Time is unfortunately very limited for me..
Don't stay up too late ;-)
On February 18, 2009 03:33:07 am Robert Jonsson wrote:
> Great to see things rolling along here :)
Hmm, already we have issues - the post yesterday about lash
really surprises me. I thought I took care of that.
> Feels like the real 1.0 is not that far away!
Remember, when I started contributing, QT4 was just a dream !
Now of course, I sort of wish I had helped with muse 2.0, but
at the time it was so 'up in the air' I didn't think it was my place to
meddle with it and I didn't really have a good understanding of how
everything worked, so I felt I should finish what I started...
Muse 1 was a good learning experience, good starting point.
Hope it doesn't become too obsolete too soon...
> As someone requested I'll try to update the news page in the recent future.
> As for the patches, Tim, I'd be eternally grateful if you could take
> responsibility to check them in. Time is unfortunately very limited for
> Don't stay up too late ;-)
Who, me? Or you?
Gee, I didn't think anyone payed attention to the message post time !
I guess when you see 1, 2, 3 AM etc it gives it away.
My post was 1AM but yours was 3AM ! Hope it was not a work day !