Re: Tagged branch-4-0-stable, head now 4.1.0

[Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...>]

Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:

>To avoid us getting in each other's way massively, I suggest Ethan goes
>first, since his list of patches ready to throw in seems the most
>massive...  Once those are out of the way, we'll have to discuss which
>of the other patchsets available at SourceForge we want to merge in
>as they are, and which need further consideration.
>
>"Gentleman, start your engines."
>

Bruum, bruum...

>May the madness ensue --- *now*.
>

Just to get the worst over, I've updated the image patch including the 
coding style suggestions.  For the most part it wasn't too bad.  One big 
hunk was a problem, however.  I basically did a diff on the latest file 
in question and its corresponding previous working file, which turned 
out fairly small.  After block copying the bad hunk, I searched the 
newly created diff file for any white space or function declaration 
problems that conflicted, located and fixed them and that was it... oh 
and the four strange compiler warnings are gone (yay!).

Dan