Re: [PATCH] libpipe/pq.c

On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 06:02:37PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 06:44:00PM +0300, Ognyan Kulev wrote: > > Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > >Please write a changelog, and I will have the testing done by the time you > > >have the changelog entries done :) > > > > :-/ I forg

Re: [PATCH] libpipe/pq.c

On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 07:41:53PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 07:37:21PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 06:02:37PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 06:44:00PM +0300, Ognyan Kulev wrote: > > > > :-/ I forgot to cha

Re: [PATCH] libpipe/pq.c

On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 07:37:21PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 06:02:37PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 06:44:00PM +0300, Ognyan Kulev wrote: > > > Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > > >Please write a changelog, and I will have the testing done by t

Re: [PATCH] libpipe/pq.c

On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 06:44:00PM +0300, Ognyan Kulev wrote: > Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > >Please write a changelog, and I will have the testing done by the time you > >have the changelog entries done :) > > :-/ I forgot to change the copyright years too. Sorry. Well, I forgot it as well :) F

Re: [PATCH] libpipe/pq.c

Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > Please write a changelog, and I will have the testing done by the time you > have the changelog entries done :) :-/ I forgot to change the copyright years too. Sorry. Regards -- Ognyan Kulev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "\"Programmer\""

Re: [PATCH] libpipe/pq.c

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 08:49:40PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 04:49:36PM +0300, Ognyan Kulev wrote: > > Ognyan Kulev wrote: > > > > > > What did you decide about these patches? > > Please write a change

Re: [PATCH] libpipe/pq.c

On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:48:08PM +0300, Ognyan Kulev wrote: > > I don't know how this library is used so it is possible that a part of > its interfaces demand that ports are already removed by > `packet_read_ports'. But why then `pq_dequeue' calls > `packet_dealloc_ports'? So i think the c

Re: [PATCH] libpipe/pq.c

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 04:49:36PM +0300, Ognyan Kulev wrote: > Ognyan Kulev wrote: > > > What did you decide about these patches? Please write a changelog, and I will have the testing done by the time you have the changelog entries

Re: [PATCH] libpipe/pq.c

> Ognyan Kulev wrote: > > > What did you decide about these patches? I think I overlooked that when you posted it. Sorry. I haven't looked real closely. Off hand these fixes look ok to me. If Marcus or Neal can test them and com

Re: [PATCH] libpipe/pq.c

Hi, Ognyan Kulev wrote: What did you decide about these patches? Regards -- Ognyan Kulev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "\"Programmer\"" ___ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.g

[PATCH] libpipe/pq.c

Hi, In `libpipe/pq.c:packet_set_ports' when the new ports array is bigger than `packet->ports' a new ports array is malloced but it doesn't replace the old one. The first patch fix this. In some places in the file `sizeof (mach_port_t *)' is used while obviously `sizeof (mach_port_t)' is mea