| To: | Thomas Graichen <thomas.graichen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: loop-6 and the XFS tree |
| From: | Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:56:58 +0100 |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20010228145021.P453@suse.de>; from axboe@suse.de on Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 02:50:21PM +0100 |
| References: | <news2mail-97fo1e$rb$3@mate.bln.innominate.de> <20010227153839.D16652@suse.de> <news2mail-97ii91$cnk$1@mate.bln.innominate.de> <20010228142712.N453@suse.de> <20010228145021.P453@suse.de> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, Feb 28 2001, Jens Axboe wrote: > > should look like. Make the size_t unsigned int instead in loop > > and rd. > > My mistake, I was looking at the wrong function. There's no > mixup in the xfs tree. I would provide a patch for rd too, but the tree still has the kgcc stupidity that prevents me from compiling. Yes I could fix it easily, but it annoys me heavily that such a change was made blindly assuming that we all need kgcc. So I'm holding further contributions for now until this is fixed -- yes I'm silly, but so is this assumption. -- Jens Axboe |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: loop-6 and the XFS tree, Jens Axboe |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: loop-6 and the XFS tree, Seth Mos |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: loop-6 and the XFS tree, Jens Axboe |
| Next by Thread: | Re: loop-6 and the XFS tree, Seth Mos |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |