On 28 April 2013 15:25, Marc Espie wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:12:21AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
>> FWIW I don't believe this sort of patch significantly affects
>> debugging because that should be done with -O0 -g anyways.
>
> Bwahahaha
>
> You're lucky to not run into compiler bugs that
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 09:12:21AM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
> FWIW I don't believe this sort of patch significantly affects
> debugging because that should be done with -O0 -g anyways.
Bwahahaha
You're lucky to not run into compiler bugs that only show up with -O2.
Good luck figuring THOSE out w
On Sun, 28 Apr 2013, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > On Sunday 21 April 2013, Philip Guenther wrote:
> > > Maybe this should be handled the bool bits in ,
> > > wrapping them in #ifdef _KERNEL ?
> >
> > #ifdef _KERNEL is fine with me.
>
> OK for the patch b
Diff below is a rework of the suspend/resume logic in ehci(4).
If you're not interested in the full story below, please make sure
it doesn't introduce any regression on your machine(s) and, in any
case report to me (with your dmesg!) thanks :)
Full story:
So this diff changes the way we supsen
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 01:04:26PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
Regarding your test program, I have a small nit: You've sent a test
program that uses the es_CO locale, which probably only exists on
your own patched system, so the test program doesn't work elsewhere.
Please consider sending test
On Sunday 28 April 2013, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Just drop the ptrdiff_t bit completely please. I
> don't think it should be used in the kernel; there always is a
> more appropriate kernel type to use.
Does it then still make sense to use %td in printf for differences of
pointers, or should we s
> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 11:52:47 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Stefan Fritsch
>
> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > On Sunday 21 April 2013, Philip Guenther wrote:
> >> Maybe this should be handled the bool bits in ,
> >> wrapping them in #ifdef _KERNEL ?
> >
> > #ifdef _KERNEL is fine with
On Sun, 21 Apr 2013, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Sunday 21 April 2013, Philip Guenther wrote:
Maybe this should be handled the bool bits in ,
wrapping them in #ifdef _KERNEL ?
#ifdef _KERNEL is fine with me.
OK for the patch below?
--- a/gnu/gcc/gcc/c-format.c
+++ b/gnu/gcc/gcc/c-format.c
@@ -
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 07:17:27PM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 08:07:42AM -0400, Ryan Kavanagh wrote:
> > Hi Jason,
> >
> > On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 at 08:08:59 +0059, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> > > i've committed this, but used the text from freebsd's man page. it was
>
