Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 05/30/2012 03:12 PM, Jim Meyering wrote: >> Anthony Liguori wrote: >>> On 05/09/2012 10:12 PM, Jim Meyering wrote: >>>> Peter Maydell wrote: >>>>> On 9 May 2012 15:01, Jim Meyering<j...@meyering.net> wrote: >>>>>> From 402100deb7e27b1d7ac619ebac963f861fae91b0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>>>>> From: Jim Meyering<meyer...@redhat.com> >>>>>> Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 18:34:26 +0200 >>>>>> Subject: [PATCH] linux-user: remove two unchecked uses of strdup >>>>>> >>>>>> Remove two uses of strdup (use g_path_get_basename instead), >>>>>> and add a comment that this strncpy use is ok. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jim Meyering<meyer...@redhat.com> >>>>> >>>>> This version >>>>> Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell<peter.mayd...@linaro.org> >>>>> >>>>> but you'll need to retransmit it (presumably as part of a v2 >>>>> of this series) so it is in the proper format for a patch email >>>>> (otherwise all the conversational chatter ends up in the git >>>>> commit message). >>>> >>>> Thanks again. >>>> I'm amending to reflect ACKs and Reviewed-by: comments as they come in, >>>> as well as corrections like yours. >>>> >>>> I expect to repost the whole series (or any subset) when appropriate. >>>> Or I can push it to a publicly-accessible repository somewhere. >>> >>> Has this gotten reposted? I don't see a new version on the list. >> >> Hi Anthony, >> I've reposted (as V2, V3, etc.) any individual patch that required revision, >> but have not reposted the series. I would have reposted, but I recall >> someone saying that their tools managed quite well with the one-off >> reposts. > > I corrected myself later as I misunderstood your question. It handles > the acked-bys but not partial updates to a patch series. > >> Would you like me to repost just this one or the whole 22-patch series? > > Could you please repost the full series?
Sure. Rebased, confirmed it still compiles and passes "make check" and reposted as v2. FYI, this time I sent only to qemu-devel, rather than adding per-patch Cc's.
