On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Janne Blomqvist wrote: > > > Oops, I forgot to update some parts in an #ifdef branch that isn't > > > taken on my target. I'll try to find time to fix it later tonight. If > > > you're in a hurry, just replace > > > > > > fstrcpy (iqp->name, iqp->name_len, u->file, u->file_len); > > > > > > with > > > > > > cf_strcpy (iqp->name, iqp->name_len, u->filename); > > > > > > in inquire.c. > > > > Thanks, build completes and I'll commit the following as obvious > > if there are no regressions. > > Since there are 25 related regressions, not committed. > There must be something else amiss too.
On the other hand, the tree *is* broken for some ports; I'd prefer regressions to that. So, unless you're onto this, how do you feel about me committing the posted patch and opening a PR for the regressions? brgds, H-P
