Markus Duft wrote: > On 01/20/2011 09:53 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: > [snip] >> >> There was no need to rebase. >> However, there was no ChangeLog entry, and the style of your added >> function did not match the existing code (we require a space before >> most open parentheses, and declare pointers like char *p, not "char* p"), >> so my pre-apply clean-up and review took more time than usual. >> >> I wrote the ChangeLog entry and fixed the code formatting. >> Oh, your patch added trailing blanks, too. Removed. > > uh - thanks for the formatting, and sorry for the mis-formatted code. > >> >> On the semantics of the patch, I don't like using NAME_MAX, >> char node[9 + NAME_MAX]; >> (some systems don't define it at all) >> but since this code is compiled only on Interix, I didn't bother >> to change it. >> >> This commit has your name of course, but I've changed enough >> that I'll wait for an ACK before pushing. >> Below I've included one more patch to clean up some more >> code formatting nits in that same file. > > thanks a lot :)
Pushed.
