Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Actually this seems more appropriately run from a checked-out
>> gnulib directory, e.g., as part of a "make check" rule.
>
> I would much prefer if the gnulib/Makefile "check" rule be reserved
> to platform independent checks on the g
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Btw, the useless-if-before-free help says that
>
> Exit status:
>
> 0 no match
> 1 one or more matches
>
> but it appears to be the opposite: 0 for one or more matches (like 'grep').
Yep. Good catch.
It's fixed now.
Thanks.
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Actually this seems more appropriately run from a checked-out
> gnulib directory, e.g., as part of a "make check" rule.
I would much prefer if the gnulib/Makefile "check" rule be reserved
to platform independent checks on the gnulib code. Tests of some programs
belong in the
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I noticed that I'd broken my useless-if-before-free script.
> It would only notice the useless tests if there were
> a cast on the argument to the free-like function.
>
> I've just pushed this correction and will add unit tests.
FYI, I've written a cheap u
I noticed that I'd broken my useless-if-before-free script.
It would only notice the useless tests if there were
a cast on the argument to the free-like function.
I've just pushed this correction and will add unit tests.
>From e47886762b67882c67f9b76f41a1f89c3552c4aa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From
