Hello,
On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 03:13:06PM +0100, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> I think it's ready to go now :-)
Great :-) I've pushed the final version of the patch to the master
branch.
Regards,
Sergiu
Hi,
I think it's ready to go now :-)
-antrik-
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:18:45AM +0200, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> [...] Thus, if I did everything correctly, it seems that we have no
> problems syncing really read-only filesystems either.
Great :-) That's what I hoped for, just wanted to be sure.
> +assert (err == 0);
Another thing yo
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 12:30:56PM +0200, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 09:58:31AM +0100, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 06:56:41PM +0200, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> > > That's why I think I agree with you and I made unionfs sync every
> > > unioned
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 06:56:41PM +0200, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 01:03:29AM +0100, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net
> wrote:
> > I think the initialization of "i" should be as close to the loop as
> > possible -- after all, it's a loop counter...
>
> I moved it closer to the l
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 11:44:59PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> I think that file_syncfs is equivalent to fsys_syncfs, the difference
> being in the target of invocation (file_syncfs is invoked on a port to
> a file, while fsys_syncfs is invoked on the control port).
Yeah, that's my underst
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 05:04:07PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 08:57:46PM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net
> wrote:
> > The origianl patch is wrong and needs to be reverted, and a new one
> > comitted once all concerns actually have been addressed.
>
> A follow-up p
Hello,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 05:04:07PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 08:57:46PM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
>
> > The origianl patch is wrong and needs to be reverted, and a new one
> > comitted once all concerns actually have been addressed.
>
> A follow-up
Hello!
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 08:57:46PM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 12:30:30AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > Please, please, please, let's try to finally get some of these patches
> > installed before discussing matters to death.
>
> The real problem is n
Hello,
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 08:57:46PM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
>
> I know that my reviews are too pedantic at times -- partially on
> purpose, trying to establish some good practices; partially because of
> my annoying perfectionism. But here I didn't just talk about formalities
>
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 12:30:30AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Please, please, please, let's try to finally get some of these patches
> installed before discussing matters to death.
The real problem is not patches being discussed to death, but rather
patches that have been reviewed still
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 09:19:17PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 08:08:20AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 10:50:07PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 03:56:02AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> > > > On
Hello!
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 04:36:45PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:42:41AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > This comment is based on the version of the patch that you installed into
> > master. (By the way: this commit didn't show up on commit-hurd; I'll
> > have
Hello,
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:42:41AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> This comment is based on the version of the patch that you installed into
> master. (By the way: this commit didn't show up on commit-hurd; I'll
> have a look at that.)
Is it my duty to look after my commits showing up on
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:42:41AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> /* We can only report back a single error value; the first one
> wins. */
> if (! err)
> err = err_l;
"Last one wins" would be easier to implement -- and I think it's more
common
Hello!
This comment is based on the version of the patch that you installed into
master. (By the way: this commit didn't show up on commit-hurd; I'll
have a look at that.)
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 10:50:07PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 03:56:02AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@
Hello,
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 12:30:30AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 09:19:17PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 08:08:20AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 10:50:07PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> > > > On Sat,
Hello!
Please, please, please, let's try to finally get some of these patches
installed before discussing matters to death. Of course, discussion is
very important -- and many thanks to Olaf et al. for doing all these
reviews! -- but I'm totally losing track of all these emails and huge
discussio
Hello,
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 08:08:20AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 10:50:07PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 03:56:02AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:30:41PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
>
> > >
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 10:50:07PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 03:56:02AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:30:41PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> > > + Modified by Sergiu Ivanov .
> > > +
> >
> > You can do this if it's important
Hello,
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 03:56:02AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:30:41PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/netfs.c b/netfs.c
> > index 89d1bf6..d8211e0 100644
> > --- a/netfs.c
> > +++ b/netfs.c
> > @@ -1,7 +1,10 @@
> > /* Hurd unionfs
> >
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:30:41PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> diff --git a/netfs.c b/netfs.c
> index 89d1bf6..d8211e0 100644
> --- a/netfs.c
> +++ b/netfs.c
> @@ -1,7 +1,10 @@
> /* Hurd unionfs
> - Copyright (C) 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> + Copyright (C) 2
22 matches
Mail list logo
