m. allan noah writes: > On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 11:23 PM, Olaf Meeuwissen > <paddy-h...@member.fsf.org> wrote: >> Hi Allan, >> >> m. allan noah writes: >> >>> I have just pushed all these changes, and a few more to git repo. I >>> have a few more minor bug fixes assigned to me that will go up in a >>> few hours. >> >> Many thanks! I've checked all my branches against 87bfd53, removed all >> branches that are in from my GitLab clone and closed any related bug >> reports. Hope I didn't miss any. >> >> Talking about missing things, it seems you forgot about the Hungarian >> translations. There's a pu/add-hu.po-313073 branch on my GitLab clone >> that has not been merged yet. Any reason this didn't get in? > > Hmm- i missed that one. It is pushed now.
Thanks. Closed the ticket and removed my pu/ branch. >> Sorry about dropping the ball on the musl inb() outb() branch. I had >> meant to commit configure.in but seem to have committed configure :-( > > Do you have a version which uses AC_* macros instead of what I did? I > think that would be cleaner. I just applied the patch that Luiz mentioned on the mailing list[1]. Looking at that patch again I guess it'd be better to replace your stuff with what's in the patch. I've put up a pu/fixup-inb-outb-changes branch to do just that[2]. [1] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/luizluca/openwrt-packages/e11fbf71f7f437c64d18929e7895dbaafa8c3293/utils/sane-backends/patches/020-inb_outb.patch [2] https://gitlab.com/sane-project/backends/branches >> After I pushed (what became) 9dd31f9 I had second thoughts when I >> recalled that there was something special with lists constraints. >> Cross-checking with the spec, it turns out my changeset is okay. > > Yes- I stared at that code for quite awhile. I think the new code is > more clear, so even if it did not fix the problem, it is still a > reasonable change. It's not just more clear, it's the Right Thing to do for string type constraint lists. However, for a word type constraint list it would be the wrong thing to do. After I fixed the original code, I started to wonder why it was written like that in the first place. Then I remembered the Pascal string like behaviour, where the first element contains the array size, for word type constraint lists. Hope this helps, -- Olaf Meeuwissen, LPIC-2 FSF Associate Member since 2004-01-27 Support Free Software Support the Free Software Foundation https://my.fsf.org/donate https://my.fsf.org/join -- sane-devel mailing list: sane-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sane-devel Unsubscribe: Send mail with subject "unsubscribe your_password" to sane-devel-requ...@lists.alioth.debian.org
