On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Christian Couder writes:
>>
>> It looks like this patch is not in pu. Maybe it has fallen through the
>> cracks?
>
> Yup, it indeed was ignored (giving priority to work towards 2.8
> during
Christian Couder writes:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Christian Couder
> wrote:
>> In parse_binary() there is:
>>
>> forward = parse_binary_hunk(, , , );
>> if (!forward && !status)
>> /* there has to
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Christian Couder
wrote:
> In parse_binary() there is:
>
> forward = parse_binary_hunk(, , , );
> if (!forward && !status)
> /* there has to be one hunk (forward hunk) */
> return
In parse_binary() there is:
forward = parse_binary_hunk(, , , );
if (!forward && !status)
/* there has to be one hunk (forward hunk) */
return error(_("unrecognized binary patch at line %d"),
linenr-1);
so parse_binary() can return -1, because
4 matches
Mail list logo