Re: VMS: Fix explicit rules for VMS

2014-10-19 Thread Paul Smith
I pushed these fixes. Note that I modified some of the patches slightly to fix up some coding standard issues, etc. You should rebase or merge your subsequent changes to the current master HEAD. On Fri, 2014-10-17 at 19:22 -0500, John E. Malmberg wrote: > On the archive patch, I forgot to add th

Re: VMS: Fix explicit rules for VMS

2014-10-17 Thread John E. Malmberg
On 10/17/2014 7:45 AM, Paul Smith wrote: On Thu, 2014-10-16 at 23:29 -0500, John E. Malmberg wrote: On 10/8/2014 10:14 PM, John E. Malmberg wrote: On 10/7/2014 11:43 PM, Paul Smith wrote: Some of the same formatting notes as before; please check your code against the style of the rest of the c

Re: VMS: Fix explicit rules for VMS

2014-10-17 Thread Paul Smith
On Thu, 2014-10-16 at 23:29 -0500, John E. Malmberg wrote: > On 10/8/2014 10:14 PM, John E. Malmberg wrote: > > On 10/7/2014 11:43 PM, Paul Smith wrote: > >> Some of the same formatting notes as before; please check your code > >> against the style of the rest of the code. > > > > Reformatted patch

Re: VMS: Fix explicit rules for VMS

2014-10-16 Thread John E. Malmberg
On 10/8/2014 10:14 PM, John E. Malmberg wrote: On 10/7/2014 11:43 PM, Paul Smith wrote: Some of the same formatting notes as before; please check your code against the style of the rest of the code. Reformatted patch to GNU coding standard. Rebuilt to add a fix to remake.c to call gpath_sear

Re: VMS: Fix explicit rules for VMS

2014-10-08 Thread John E. Malmberg
On 10/7/2014 11:43 PM, Paul Smith wrote: Some of the same formatting notes as before; please check your code against the style of the rest of the code. Reformatted patch to GNU coding standard. Regards, -John >From 1260e3ae9c0725e3f8f7e7a790c9f5fcf67fbde6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: John

Re: VMS: Fix explicit rules for VMS

2014-10-07 Thread Paul Smith
Some of the same formatting notes as before; please check your code against the style of the rest of the code. It seems picky and I can clean these up myself afterwards, but I don't know whether to do it in the same commit (which is weird since it will have two authors) or in a followup commit (wh