2012-03-21 15:29, rong deng skrev: > ? 2012?3?21? ??3:21?David Henningsson > <david.henningsson at canonical.com > <mailto:david.henningsson at canonical.com>>??? > > On 03/20/2012 03:48 PM, rong deng wrote: > > Hi all, > > This is Deng Zhenrong from Shanghai China, I've already used > Linux as my > main desktop for several years. Now I would like to express my > interests > in applying pulseaudio's projects for this year's GSoC in this mail. > > > Hi Deng and welcome to PulseAudio! :-) > > > Hi David, > > Thanks for replying this message. > > More contributors are always welcome. As for GSoC, I have never > mentored anyone and won't be able to do so this summer either, so > I'll let somebody else answer to that. > > > No problem. :-) > > > Glancing through the ideas, I find I'm interested in several few > already. :) But I'd like to focus on one thing which is test/log > facilities for now. I'm still doing my homework on this topic > and I'll > come up with more detailed info in later days. > > So to get my hands dirty, I've already downloaded pulseaudio > source code > and compile it and set it up. Now I find there's a compilation > warning, > and here's my patch to fix it, cool :) > > I'm attaching the patch generated from git format-patch, I'm not > sure > whether it's OK, as I see it from the mailing list, other developers > send patches directly in mails. This patch is my first one to get > familiar with the workflow, if there's anything wrong, please > tell me. :) > > > As for the patch, I believe you did most things right. :-) Some > people prefer you send the patch using "git send-email", but for me, > it does not matter much. > > > OK. I'll try to use "git send-email" for later patches. I haven't set up > this mail system yet, I'll try to figure it out... A google search for "gmail git send-email" seems to suggest a few good hints, so shouldn't be too difficult I hope. > As for using the PRI-prefixes, it seems we do not use this anywhere > else in the code. Therefore I have two questions: > > 1) Do you think there is a risk that some compiler that we want to > build PulseAudio under, does not support these prefixes (remember, > this is not only used in Linux, but in Windows, Mac OS, OS/2 IIRC > and others)? > > > No, I don't think it's a risk, as this PRI-prefix is defined in > inttypes.h header file, and according to manual, it is a standard. > > 2) Would "%llx" solve this warning equally well? > > On 32-bit system, yes, but then, it's not portable. > To print uin64_t on 32 bit system, we should use %llx, > but to print it on 64 bit system, we should use %lx instead. PRI-prefix > help us handle this. > > Yes, there IS another way to handle, we can explicitly cast > 'pa_channel_position_mask_t' to 'unsigned long long' and use %llx. A quick grep through the code shows that this is how we've been doing it up till now, so we should probably keep it that way for consistency. So, just for education, would you mind resending the patch with git send-email, and using %llx ? Thanks! -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic
