From: Jeff D. <jd...@ka...> - 2002-07-30 18:50:53
|
This patch fixes the hostfs breakage in -47 which everyone thought was a typo for some reason. It also fixes the crash that mistral noticed when his xterms died. Jeff |
From: Matt Z. <md...@de...> - 2002-07-31 01:49:05
|
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 02:53:58PM -0500, Jeff Dike wrote: > This patch fixes the hostfs breakage in -47 which everyone thought was a > typo for some reason. hostfs still appears to be broken. hostfs_kern.c: In function `get_inode': hostfs_kern.c:378: `HOSTFS_DIR' undeclared (first use in this function) hostfs_kern.c:378: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once hostfs_kern.c:378: for each function it appears in.) hostfs_kern.c:382: `HOSTFS_SYMLINK' undeclared (first use in this function) hostfs_kern.c:395: `HOSTFS_CHARDEV' undeclared (first use in this function) hostfs_kern.c:398: `HOSTFS_BLOCDEV' undeclared (first use in this function) hostfs_kern.c:401: `HOSTFS_FIFO' undeclared (first use in this function) hostfs_kern.c:404: `HOSTFS_SOCK' undeclared (first use in this function) hostfs_kern.c:396: warning: unreachable code at beginning of switch statement Are these meant to be changed to OS_TYPE_*? -- - mdz |
From: Jeff D. <jd...@ka...> - 2002-07-31 03:12:29
|
md...@de... said: > hostfs still appears to be broken. You know what your problem is? You're too quick. You need to chill out a little. Next time I release a patch, just ignore it for a few hours. Kick back and enjoy a cold one. OK, the real answer is that it occurred to me (after I released the patch) that perhaps building hostfs would be a good way to check that I fixed it. And guess what I found? So, I quietly fixed that and replaced the patch with one that works. So just grab it again, and things will be good. Jeff |
From: Matt Z. <md...@de...> - 2002-07-31 04:26:03
|
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 11:15:22PM -0500, Jeff Dike wrote: > md...@de... said: > > hostfs still appears to be broken. > > You know what your problem is? You're too quick. You need to chill out > a little. Next time I release a patch, just ignore it for a few hours. > > Kick back and enjoy a cold one. I think you've interpreted a tone in my messages that was not intended. If I encounter a problem when building the latest release, I assume that you are not aware of the problem and I notify you. It is that simple. I get new releases quickly because I semi-automatically poll for new releases of software for which I maintain Debian packages. So please drop the personal remarks, and let's not allow this to get out of hand, ok? There really is no need. The new "2.4.18-48" builds and works for me. -- - mdz |