On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:01:52AM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > This patch is: > Tested-by: Ben Widawsky <[email protected]> > > For patch 2, I'd prefer to just always do the rename, as long as you don't > touch > the original data. I don't see a usecase where anyone would expect and act > upon > this failure. If you must, provide a flag to not do the rename.
If it's all the same then, I'll push patch 1 so we have a good error message, and then write a patch to automatically rename the result, without overwriting. > > (If I were being a pedant I would also say you should have patch1 refer to a > tool that doesn't exist until the next patch, but meh). > > Thanks. > [snip]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
