On 09.02.2012, at 19:43, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 09.02.2012 19:30, schrieb Alex Barcelo:
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Barcelo
>
> This patch needs a better description than "bug"
Yes. In general I also reject patches with empty description.
> , and you forgot to cc the linux-user maintainer
Yes
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 19:43, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 09.02.2012 19:30, schrieb Alex Barcelo:
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Barcelo
>
> This patch needs a better description than "bug",
sorry, something like "Incorrect zero comparison in sas_ss_flags"
would have been better. I used my internal git n
Am 09.02.2012 19:30, schrieb Alex Barcelo:
> Signed-off-by: Alex Barcelo
This patch needs a better description than "bug", and you forgot to cc
the linux-user maintainer. The patch should describe what it touches
(linux-user), what it does, what for and make clear why that is correct.
Is there a
Signed-off-by: Alex Barcelo
---
linux-user/signal.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/linux-user/signal.c b/linux-user/signal.c
index 79a39dc..26e0530 100644
--- a/linux-user/signal.c
+++ b/linux-user/signal.c
@@ -4115,7 +4115,7 @@ static target_ulong get_s
