I just submitted a patchset with more detailed commit comments.. It's
the same change wrapped in a, hopefully, prettier candy coating.
wt
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Brad Boyer <flar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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
