On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 05:39:55PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> Hi Paul
>
> On Mon, 5 Sep 2011, Paul Mundt wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 06:26:34PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > > A simple cosmetic clean-up, no functional changes. Patch 2/2 depends on
> > > patch 1/2 an
Hi Paul
On Mon, 5 Sep 2011, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 06:26:34PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > A simple cosmetic clean-up, no functional changes. Patch 2/2 depends on
> > patch 1/2 and can wait until 3.3. Paul, would you be able to put it under
> > the carpet somewhe
On Mon, 5 Sep 2011, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 06:26:34PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > A simple cosmetic clean-up, no functional changes. Patch 2/2 depends on
> > patch 1/2 and can wait until 3.3. Paul, would you be able to put it under
> > the carpet somewhere until
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 06:26:34PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> A simple cosmetic clean-up, no functional changes. Patch 2/2 depends on
> patch 1/2 and can wait until 3.3. Paul, would you be able to put it under
> the carpet somewhere until then or shall I resend it after 3.2-rc1 is out?
A simple cosmetic clean-up, no functional changes. Patch 2/2 depends on
patch 1/2 and can wait until 3.3. Paul, would you be able to put it under
the carpet somewhere until then or shall I resend it after 3.2-rc1 is out?
After both these patches have been applied, we can remove struct
sh_mmcif_
