Re: PING: Re: [patch] tag ../include/*

2014-10-13 Thread Jeff Law
On 10/13/14 11:29, Aldy Hernandez wrote: On 10/13/14 09:27, Jeff Law wrote: On 10/13/14 08:53, Aldy Hernandez wrote: PING On 10/07/14 09:37, Aldy Hernandez wrote: Is there a reason we don't create etags for toplevel include files? If not, could I please apply this patch? ENOPATCH jeff So

Re: PING: Re: [patch] tag ../include/*

2014-10-13 Thread Aldy Hernandez
On 10/13/14 09:27, Jeff Law wrote: On 10/13/14 08:53, Aldy Hernandez wrote: PING On 10/07/14 09:37, Aldy Hernandez wrote: Is there a reason we don't create etags for toplevel include files? If not, could I please apply this patch? ENOPATCH jeff Sorry, patch was in original message. Attac

Re: PING: Re: [patch] tag ../include/*

2014-10-13 Thread Jeff Law
On 10/13/14 08:53, Aldy Hernandez wrote: PING On 10/07/14 09:37, Aldy Hernandez wrote: Is there a reason we don't create etags for toplevel include files? If not, could I please apply this patch? ENOPATCH jeff

PING: Re: [patch] tag ../include/*

2014-10-13 Thread Aldy Hernandez
PING On 10/07/14 09:37, Aldy Hernandez wrote: Is there a reason we don't create etags for toplevel include files? If not, could I please apply this patch? Thanks. Aldy

Re: [patch] tag ../include/*

2014-10-07 Thread Mike Stump
On Oct 7, 2014, at 9:37 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > Is there a reason we don't create etags for toplevel include files? I don’t think there is. > If not, could I please apply this patch? I’m in favor.

[patch] tag ../include/*

2014-10-07 Thread Aldy Hernandez
Is there a reason we don't create etags for toplevel include files? If not, could I please apply this patch? Thanks. Aldy commit a679529d14f005d8c88517f72d2b5295d8c82f0f Author: Aldy Hernandez Date: Tue Oct 7 09:32:21 2014 -0700 * Makefile.in (TAGS): Tag ../include files. diff --gi