On Sep 22 2016, Eric Pruitt wrote:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 05:48:51PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
Was going to use this to monitor battery, but HUNK #10 fails - looking
at the patch and dwm.c, the code is totally different at around line
664:
Are you using the tagged 6.1 release or 6.1/HEAD? My
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 05:48:51PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
> Was going to use this to monitor battery, but HUNK #10 fails - looking
> at the patch and dwm.c, the code is totally different at around line
> 664:
Are you using the tagged 6.1 release or 6.1/HEAD? My version of the
patch applies clean
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Nick Warne wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Was going to use this to monitor battery, but HUNK #10 fails - looking
> at the patch and dwm.c, the code is totally different at around line
> 664:
>
> Hunk #7 succeeded at 292.
> Hunk #8 succeeded at 516.
> Hunk #9 succeeded at 566
Hi all,
Was going to use this to monitor battery, but HUNK #10 fails - looking
at the patch and dwm.c, the code is totally different at around line
664:
Hunk #7 succeeded at 292.
Hunk #8 succeeded at 516.
Hunk #9 succeeded at 566.
Hunk #10 FAILED at 664.
Hunk #11 succeeded at 744 (offset -5 lines