On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 02:51:40PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:56:48 -0800
> Warren Turkal <wt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > @@ -15,12 +15,12 @@
> > #include <linux/vfs.h>
> > #include <linux/nls.h>
> >
> > +#include "hfsplus_fs.h"
> > +
> > static struct inode *hfsplus_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb);
> > static void hfsplus_destroy_inode(struct inode *inode);
> > static bool hfsplus_vol_has_journal(struct hfsplus_vh *vhdr);
> >
> > -#include "hfsplus_fs.h"
> > -
> > static bool hfsplus_vol_has_journal(struct hfsplus_vh *vhdr)
> > {
> > return (vhdr->attributes & cpu_to_be32(HFSPLUS_VOL_JOURNALED) &&
>
> again: what was wrong with the old code??
I just realized what you were asking after I sent my other reply. The
include needs to move so 'struct hfsplus_vh' is declared before the
function prototype. That happens in hfsplus_fs.h.
My apologies for the noise, although I stand by my statement that I
have no intention of actively maintaining this code myself.
> If it was causing some compilation problem then please quote the compiler
> output in the changelog.
The original submitter would need to include the actual compiler output.
Brad Boyer
flar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
