Re: [uml-devel] Re: [patch 1/9] uml: fix lvalue for gcc4

2005-07-13 Thread Blaisorblade
On Wednesday 13 July 2005 23:29, Andrew Morton wrote: > Please identify which of these patches you consider to be 2.6.13 material. All ones are for 2.6.13... except this one, it's still wrong, I overlooked it a bit too much, it must be replaced by this (I'll post it in a mail it if needed): http

Re: [patch 1/9] uml: fix lvalue for gcc4

2005-07-13 Thread Andrew Morton
Please identify which of these patches you consider to be 2.6.13 material. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.t

[patch 1/9] uml: fix lvalue for gcc4

2005-07-13 Thread blaisorblade
From: Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This construct is refused by GCC 4, so here's the (corrected) fix. Thanks to Russell for noticing a stupid mistake I did when first sending this. As he noted, the code is largely suboptimal however it cur