On Thursday 18 August 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 08/18/2011 12:51 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> > OK, given your considerations, I've updated my patch with the attached
> > squash-in. The amended patch is attached too. Let me know if it is
> > good to apply now.
>
> I think it's good enough n
On Thu, 18 Aug 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
OK, given your considerations, I've updated my patch with the attached
squash-in. The amended patch is attached too. Let me know if it is
good to apply now.
This seems much better to me.
Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http
On 08/18/2011 12:51 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Perhaps specifying the OS release version the issue was noticed on
(not all-inclusive) or the date that the issue was noticed would be
sufficient? For example "FreeBSD 8.2" rather than "FreeBSD"? or
"FreeBSD (2011)" rather than "FreeBSD"? The dra
d{make -j 2} # FreeBSD make
+$ @kbd{make -j 2} # FreeBSD 8.2 make
Is not a tty
-$ @kbd{make -j 2} # NetBSD make
+$ @kbd{make -j 2} # NetBSD 5.1 make
--- all ---
Is not a tty
-$ @kbd{dmake -j 2} # Solaris dmake
+$ @kbd{dmake -j 2} # Solaris 10 dmake
@var{hostname} --> 1 job
@var{hostname} -->
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
What is useful information today may become 'lore' in a few years so
it would be good to add additional data so that the reader (and
documentation maintainer) knows the vintage of the information.
That's a good point. Do you think it would be OK t
Hi Bob.
On Tuesday 16 August 2011, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> >>>
> >> I'll have a "draft patch" read soonish. There is ample room for
> >> improvements,
> >> but I'll post it here anyway since it can benefit from early feedback.
> >>
> > Here it is.
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
I'll have a "draft patch" read soonish. There is ample room for improvements,
but I'll post it here anyway since it can benefit from early feedback.
Here it is. As usual, comments and suggestions welcome.
The proposed documentation seems quite
e rewriting going on that corrupt $?.
> >
> I'll have a "draft patch" read soonish. There is ample room for improvements,
> but I'll post it here anyway since it can benefit from early feedback.
>
Here it is. As usual, comments and suggestions welcome.
Regards,
St
