On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Steve French wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 09:36, Jesper Juhl wrote:
>
> > Would it be useful if I split the second patch into a few parts for you? I
>
> For the second patch (the one I did not apply) slightly smaller would
> make things easier. For patches that have non-
On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 09:36, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> Would it be useful if I split the second patch into a few parts for you? I
> could split some of the (non cifs_open related) whitespace changes into
> one, the kfree related changes into another and then a third with the
> cifs_open rework. Woul
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Steve French wrote:
> OK - the first of them is merged in to the cifs bk tree.
Thank you.
> The second one looks like an improvement on structuring of the cifs open
> logic but needs review.
Yes, it certainly does. I may be able to install windows in vmware or
borrow a ma
OK - the first of them is merged in to the cifs bk tree.
The second one looks like an improvement on structuring of the cifs open
logic but needs review. I may have a chance to test it later in the
week.
Thanks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the bo
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Steven French wrote:
>
> > Here's the first of two patches with cleanups for fs/cifs/file.c
> The patch looks safe enough but I can not get the patch to apply (pattch
> always claims it is malformed) - whichever email clients I received it
> from probably because of wrap at 8
5 matches
Mail list logo