"Jeremy Olexa" wrote:
> New subscriber here and I would like to get some help with this issue
> on AIX 6.1.
>
> Here is the relevant code snippet:
> depbase=`echo getloadavg.o | sed 's|[^/]*$|.deps/&|;s|\.o$||'`;\
> powerpc-ibm-aix6.1.0.0-gcc -std=gnu99 -I. -g -O2 -MT
> getloadavg.o
No big deal, but...
Ok, Bruno?
>From 24cb49400d1349f29f745e74979b5ce45022288f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jim Meyering
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 17:08:33 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] remove duplicate inclusion of
---
tests/test-fprintf-posix.c |1 -
tests/test-printf-posix.c|1 -
tes
OK, but I would still say "By portability we are not talking about
portability to other operating systems!"
___
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
Jim Meyering wrote:
> No big deal, but...
...
> tests/test-fprintf-posix.c |1 -
> tests/test-printf-posix.c|1 -
> tests/test-snprintf-posix.c |1 -
...
I've just reposted this to bug-gnulib.
___
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-core
"Vitali Lovich" wrote:
> I've read the proposed patches that have been batted around on the mailing
> list (after coming up with my own implementation :D of course). My proposed
> solution is less generic, but I believe more robust, than the other
> approaches.
>
> I've proposed my reasoning belo
Pádraig Brady wrote:
...
Thanks! That looks fine.
Minor nits in log message:
>>From fbe9201e5e2812bfc112ea05c317b194c98bb4f9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: =?utf-8?q?P=C3=A1draig=20Brady?=
> Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 01:06:10 +
> Subject: [PATCH] doc: pathchk description enhancements
>
> * d
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 5:35 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>
> "Vitali Lovich" wrote:
>
> Thanks for the patch and for writing up your assumptions.
>
> The above requirement is key... and perhaps too restrictive.
> I.e., it makes it sound like your sort could mishandle
> sizes printed by a mix of output
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 5:35 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> However, this assumption might be acceptable (other opinions welcome),
> on the condition that the code behind this option diagnoses any violation.
Sorry - I missed responding to this part in the previous e-mail.
Could you please clarify - wh
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Vitali Lovich wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 5:35 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>>
>> "Vitali Lovich" wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the patch and for writing up your assumptions.
>>
>> The above requirement is key... and perhaps too restrictive.
>> I.e., it makes it sound li
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Vitali Lovich on 1/4/2009 3:41 PM:
> I'll upload it to launchpad (do people here mind,
> or is it better form if I post the patches to the mailing list?)
I'd much rather review an inline patch sent via this list than fire up my
browser (o
jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> OK, but I would still say "By portability we are not talking about
> portability to other operating systems!"
OK, I just pushed the previous patch with the additional
tweak of amending "portable file name character set" to
"POSIX portable file name character set".
che
"Vitali Lovich" wrote:
...
> I'll upload it to launchpad (do people here mind,
> or is it better form if I post the patches to the mailing list?)
Please post change-sets to this mailing list.
To keep ubuntu folks in the list, you could give them
a link to this mailing list thread:
http://threa
Will do. I'm probably going to pick-up an intel wireless card
tomorrow, so I'll be able to get the latest patch off of my desktop.
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 1:04 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> "Vitali Lovich" wrote:
> ...
>> I'll upload it to launchpad (do people here mind,
>> or is it better form if I
13 matches
Mail list logo
