| To: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Patch for 2.4.12 borked? |
| From: | Walt H <waltabbyh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 12 Oct 2001 20:11:18 -0700 |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| References: | <3BC7A0C0.9020307@mindspring.com> <3BC7A256.7A23440C@sgi.com> <3BC7AD33.D5660FF0@sgi.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20010914 |
Yes. Except I was patching using the xfs-cvs patch to allow future
updating from CVS. That must be the difference. Not sure why, as I
assume that the standard xfs patches include the stuff in cmd/ as well?
Anyway, thanks for checking and sorry for the wild goose chase. I did
get it patched just fine from the parent dir with -p0. Thanks again for
the great FS.-Walt
Actually, it seems to work fine for me. Strange that it works for you on some files, and not on others...? |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Patch for 2.4.12 borked?, Eric Sandeen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: RH 7.1 gcc 2.96 bug (was Re: TAKE - work around gcc bug during xfs_growfs ), Gerald Henriksen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Patch for 2.4.12 borked?, Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | gcc 2.95.4-prerelease RPMS, Joseph Fannin |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |