Hello, On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 01:08:10AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 08:20:19PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 06:33:11AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 01:04:06PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > > > > +/* Starts the mountee (given by `argz` and `argz_len`), sets it on > > > > + node `np` and opens a port `port` to with `flags`. `port` is not > > > > + modified when an error occurs. */ > > > > +error_t > > > > +start_mountee (node_t * np, char * argz, size_t argz_len, int flags, > > > > + mach_port_t * port) > > > > > > [...] > > > And I still don't like "np". > > > > I looked through unionfs again and I can confirm that it uses ``np'' > > for ``node pointer'' everywhere. Should I break the convention? I do > > agree that this isn't a very intuitive name, but I'm not sure what to > > choose: a better name or consistency. > > Consistency. `np' is used throughout all of the Hurd code, and also in > the reference manual.
Fine :-) Thanks for commenting. Regards, scolobb
