[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?)
    On Feb. 11, 2008, 20:42 +0200, Andy Whitcroft <> wrote:
    > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 06:58:08PM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote:
    >> OK, but the return type doesn't have to be in the patched line, it could be in
    >> a synchronization line or even missing if the function has a long multi-line argument
    >> list.
    > Ok, I guess thats fair criticism. Could you check out the current
    > checkpatch-next (0.14-8-g3737366 or later -9, -10 etc), and see if
    > that works. It seems to on the simple examples you sent me :).

    Confirmed with 0.14-8-g3737366.



    Oh, and I really liked the fact that you print the patch file name
    in the summary line of each patch checked rather than "Your patch" :)

    > Thanks.
    > -apw

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-02-12 09:25    [W:0.041 / U:7.744 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site