On 2013.07.01 11:07, Hans de Goede wrote:
> I won't be working on issue #95, so unless someone else does it, it is
> going to get moved to the next release.
I'll try to have a stab at it this week, since it's the no-impact kind
of stuff that can happen right before release.
Regards,
/Pete
Hi,
On 06/30/2013 10:28 AM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> Once more, given the amount of changes that have been pushed since RC1,
>> I would strongly suggest that we declare RC2 and push the 1.0.16
>> milestone (due tomorrow [1]) by one week (which may give us a chance to
>> sort out #95 [2] that is s
Hi,
On 06/30/2013 01:45 AM, Pete Batard wrote:
> https://github.com/libusbx/libusbx/commit/7b893cc7cee185c0bf771166ca61a05b32800556
> should now fix the cywgin issue, as well as sort our gettimeofday()
> usage for all the Windows compilers. It also includes the missing "%s"
> reported earlier.
>
>
On 2013.06.30 08:58, Ludovic Rousseau wrote:
> 2013/6/27 Tim Roberts :
>> This is micro-optimization, of course, but it would be more efficient to
>> do this instead:
>> fputs(str, stderr);
>
> I also agree. Maybe Pete missed your email.
Oops, my bad. Apologies to Tim for missing his mail, an
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Pete Batard wrote:
>> Once more, given the amount of changes that have been pushed since RC1,
>> I would strongly suggest that we declare RC2 and push the 1.0.16
>> milestone (due tomorrow [1]) by one week (wh
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Pete Batard wrote:
> https://github.com/libusbx/libusbx/commit/7b893cc7cee185c0bf771166ca61a05b32800556
> should now fix the cywgin issue, as well as sort our gettimeofday()
> usage for all the Windows compilers. It also includes the missing "%s"
> reported earlier
2013/6/27 Tim Roberts :
> Hans de Goede wrote:
>> You're right, and I'm sorry. I guess I'm to much of a rero person sometimes.
>>
>> Although win32 is far from my specialty I think the attach patch should fix
>> it. Any chance you could give it a try?
>
> This is micro-optimization, of course, but
https://github.com/libusbx/libusbx/commit/7b893cc7cee185c0bf771166ca61a05b32800556
should now fix the cywgin issue, as well as sort our gettimeofday()
usage for all the Windows compilers. It also includes the missing "%s"
reported earlier.
The issue really was that __GCC__ never existed in the
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 2:33 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> You're right, and I'm sorry. I guess I'm to much of a rero person sometimes.
>
> Although win32 is far from my specialty I think the attach patch should fix
> it. Any chance you could give it a try?
Even though it does not fix Pete's issue u
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:15 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> On 06/27/2013 03:49 PM, Toby Gray wrote:
>>
>> This is a slightly reworked version of my previous logging patches.
>>
>> I've improved the commit message for the first patch and made the
>> changes suggested by Hans de Goede relating to retu
On 2013.06.27 19:33, Hans de Goede wrote:
> I think the attach patch should fix it. Any chance you could give it a try?
Tested. Same failure. This isn't the issue (though yes, we want to fix
that too).
The issue, as I pointed in my last e-mail, is
https://github.com/libusbx/libusbx/blob/master/l
Hans de Goede wrote:
> You're right, and I'm sorry. I guess I'm to much of a rero person sometimes.
>
> Although win32 is far from my specialty I think the attach patch should fix
> it. Any chance you could give it a try?
This is micro-optimization, of course, but it would be more efficient to
do
Hi,
On 06/27/2013 07:15 PM, Pete Batard wrote:
On 2013.06.27 16:15, Hans de Goede wrote:
Thanks, I've pushed the 1st patch,
Dammit Hans, can we please avoid [r|p]ushing _new_ core features when
we're smack down the middle of an RC? Or at least, if you deem we really
must have them, can you wa
On 2013.06.27 16:15, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Thanks, I've pushed the 1st patch,
Dammit Hans, can we please avoid [r|p]ushing _new_ core features when
we're smack down the middle of an RC? Or at least, if you deem we really
must have them, can you wait at least 24 hours before committing, so
that
On 27/06/13 16:15, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 06/27/2013 03:49 PM, Toby Gray wrote:
This is a slightly reworked version of my previous logging patches.
I've improved the commit message for the first patch and made the
changes suggested by Hans de Goede relating to return value of
snprintf ca
Hi,
On 06/27/2013 03:49 PM, Toby Gray wrote:
>
> This is a slightly reworked version of my previous logging patches.
>
> I've improved the commit message for the first patch and made the
> changes suggested by Hans de Goede relating to return value of
> snprintf calls.
Thanks, I've pushed the 1st
16 matches
Mail list logo
