Re: Warnings removed from linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c

2006-01-30 Thread Alfred M\. Szmidt
>Are you sure that changing the #ifdef to #if is the right >change? > > Quite, if you have specific concerns that I might have missed > then please speak up. Your patch is potentially a functional change; not simply a bug fix. You've defended the addition of CONFIG_BS

Re: Warnings removed from linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c

2006-01-30 Thread Alfred M. Szmidt
Are you sure that changing the #ifdef to #if is the right change? Quite, if you have specific concerns that I might have missed then please speak up. ___ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd

Re: Warnings removed from linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c

2006-01-30 Thread Neal H. Walfield
At Tue, 31 Jan 2006 01:23:02 +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > >Are you sure that changing the #ifdef to #if is the right change? > > Quite, if you have specific concerns that I might have missed then > please speak up. Your patch is potentially a functional change; not simply a bug fix. You'

Re: Warnings removed from linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c

2006-01-30 Thread Alfred M\. Szmidt
I see why this could cause a possible warning (unused function?), but I don't see why it does so. Could you show the warning message? ___ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd

Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival

2006-01-30 Thread Gianluca Guida
Hi, well bug-hurd is not properly the right place to discuss this, but I'll keep this discussion public in case someone is interested. On 1/30/06, Matheus Morais <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm a bit confuse about how mach revival project will work in some aspects. The "Revival Project" is quit

Clean gnumach code - MachRevival

2006-01-30 Thread Matheus Morais
I'm a bit confuse about how mach revival project will work in some aspects. I'm on the task to clean up gnumach code and I already made some progress removing warnings from compile proccess, as gianluca said, but I have no idea where I must post/show/give/upload these modifyed files. Maybe I must c

Re: Warnings removed from linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c

2006-01-30 Thread Alfred M. Szmidt
add_bsd_partition() is only used when MACH _and_ CONFIG_BSD_DISKLABEL are defined. 2006-01-31 Alfred M. Szmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c (add_bsd_partition): Silence compiler warning. Reported by Matheus Morais <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- genhd.

Re: Warnings removed from linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c

2006-01-30 Thread Matheus Morais
On 1/30/06, Neal H. Walfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: At Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:37:53 -0200,Matheus Morais wrote:>> Please review, diff file in attached.Thanks for the contribution.  When submitting patches please followthe following conventions: a description of what you are trying to accomplish an

Re: Warnings removed from linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c

2006-01-30 Thread Neal H. Walfield
At Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:39:39 +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > --- genhd.c 20 Jul 1999 20:33:55 +0200 1.4 > +++ genhd.c 31 Jan 2006 00:35:47 +0100 > @@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ static void add_partition (struct gendis > printk(" %s", disk_name(hd, minor, buf)); > } > > -#ifdef MACH >

Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival

2006-01-30 Thread Alfred M\. Szmidt
Note that for fixes that are more advanced than adding some casts to get rid of compile-time warnings or similar, we'd like you to assign the copyright of your changes to the FSF. Papers are not needed (but nice to have) for GNU Mach. They are a must for the Hurd though. Or that is how

Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival

2006-01-30 Thread Thomas Schwinge
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 10:53:12AM -0200, Matheus Morais wrote: > I'm a bit confuse about how mach revival project will work in some aspects. Me too, so let's try to get this sorted out right now. http://hurd.gnufans.org/bin/view/Mach/GNUMachRevivalProject> gives a rough overview about what that

Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival

2006-01-30 Thread Matheus Morais
On 1/30/06, Gianluca Guida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, Hey Gianluca well bug-hurd is not properly the right place to discuss this, butI'll keep this discussion public in case someone is interested. The "Revival Project" is quite an informal thing. It has born as a Sergio Lopez's idea mainly, w

Re: Warnings removed from linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c

2006-01-30 Thread Matheus Morais
On 1/30/06, Alfred M. Szmidt < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I see why this could cause a possible warning (unused function?), butI don't see why it does so.  Could you show the warning message Yes, unsed function, here is the warning: ../../linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c:119: warning: `add_bsd_parti

Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival

2006-01-30 Thread Alfred M\. Szmidt
[...] but I have no idea where I must post/show/give/upload these modifyed files. For now, just post them here. Anyone who follows MachRevival also follows the action on GNU Mach. And patches that end up in GNU Mach will with most certanty end up in MachRevival. MachRevival will probobly

Warnings removed from linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c

2006-01-30 Thread Matheus Morais
Please review, diff file in attached. Thanks Matheus Morais --- original/gnumach-20050801/linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c 1999-07-20 15:33:55.0 -0300 +++ gnumach-20050801/linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c 2006-01-30 15:10:23.847883856 -0200 @@ -111,18 +111,6 @@ printk(" %s", disk_nam

Re: Warnings removed from linux/dev/drivers/block/genhd.c

2006-01-30 Thread Neal H. Walfield
At Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:37:53 -0200, Matheus Morais wrote: > > Please review, diff file in attached. Thanks for the contribution. When submitting patches please follow the following conventions: a description of what you are trying to accomplish and why. In your case, you should have explained w

Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival

2006-01-30 Thread Gianluca Guida
Hey, On 1/30/06, Matheus Morais <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, you sent me already the patches. As soon as I'll make a > > repository/site or something for it, I'll put it as a first cleanup of > > the code. That's what I can do as 'clean up subproject' volunteering > > leader. If you -- for

[patch #4398] IRQ safeness for drivers

2006-01-30 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Update of patch #4398 (project hurd): Status:None => Done Assigned to:None => tschwinge Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___

Re: PCI scanning IRQ fix.

2006-01-30 Thread olafBuddenhagen
Hi, > I guess that for such a small path using Savannah's Patch system is a > waste, right? Never heard that size doesn't matter?! ;-) -antrik- ___ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd