Gianluca Guida, le Sun 08 Jan 2006 19:39:14 +0100, a écrit :
> I guess you should put a proper copyright comment. Included the real
> GPL comment.
Like this?
gnumach/ChangeLog
2006-01-08 Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Makefile.in: Always compile-in new io.c file.
* devic
Hey,
On 1/8/06, Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Agreed. Here is an updated patch
That's quite cool. Thanks.
Just another thing:
Index: device/io.c
===
RCS file: device/io.c
diff -N device/io.c
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 19
Gianluca Guida, le Sun 08 Jan 2006 18:56:21 +0100, a écrit :
> My only 0.02 euro here is that since io_port_create and
> io_port_destroy are both exported function, it would be nice to have
> the device code (ioopen and ioclose) in a separate, architecture
> independent file, since it is an archite
Looks ok to me.
My only 0.02 euro here is that since io_port_create and
io_port_destroy are both exported function, it would be nice to have
the device code (ioopen and ioclose) in a separate, architecture
independent file, since it is an architecture independent device.
G.
--
It was a type of p
Alfred M. Szmidt, le Sun 08 Jan 2006 18:06:37 +0100, a écrit :
> Once again, explanation behind the patch. We are a bit lazy, so such
> things help alot. :-)
Well, from the changelogs I read, long explanations weren't given. For
this patch, the BTS has explanations:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?
This should be merged with `gnumach, new device' from the looks. No
need to make lots of small patches that all depend on each other.
Explanation as always is needed (if there was one already, smack us
over the head with it).
2006-01-07 Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Once again, explanation behind the patch. We are a bit lazy, so such
things help alot. :-)
2006-01-07 Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* iopb.c: Include for io_req_t. New "io" device.
(ioopen): New function.
(ioclose): Likewise.
(io_bitmap_set): Treat speci
