Hello
What is the situation now? We apply this patch and then make lzo
parameter compatible? I am a bit lost
--
Ricardo Ribalda
http://www.eps.uam.es/~rribalda/
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
On Tuesday 28 April 2009 03:42:30 Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
What is the situation now? We apply this patch and then make lzo
parameter compatible? I am a bit lost
i think so ... your latest patch looked OK to me
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message
Blocks compressed with zlib dont have the full gzip header.
Without this patch, block compressed with zlib cannot be readed!
Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado ricardo.riba...@uam.es
---
v3: rename patch 2- patch 3
v2: remove unused parts..
fs/ubifs/ubifs.c |7 +--
fs/ubifs/ubifs.h
Dear Ricardo Ribalda Delgado,
In message 1240831297-15862-3-git-send-email-ricardo.riba...@uam.es you wrote:
Blocks compressed with zlib dont have the full gzip header.
Without this patch, block compressed with zlib cannot be readed!
Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado
On Monday 27 April 2009, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
#include ubifs.h
+#include u-boot/zlib.h
#if !defined(CONFIG_SYS_64BIT_VSPRINTF)
#warning Please define CONFIG_SYS_64BIT_VSPRINTF for correct output!
@@ -33,15 +34,17 @@ DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
/* compress.c */
+int zunzip(void
On Monday 27 April 2009 08:36:55 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
Blocks compressed with zlib dont have the full gzip header.
Without this patch, block compressed with zlib cannot be readed!
Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado ricardo.riba...@uam.es
Hello Wolfgang
If the only purpose of zunzip() is to be used here, then why do we not
make the parameters fit the intended purpose, thus avoiding an
additional wrapper?
The purpose of zunzip is to use it in more places. Like Mike Frysinger said:
Mike
this really should be a common function
Blocks compressed with zlib dont have the full gzip header.
Without this patch, block compressed with zlib cannot be readed!
Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado ricardo.riba...@uam.es
---
v3: Move the prototype to the header file
fs/ubifs/ubifs.c |5 +++--
fs/ubifs/ubifs.h |3 ++-
2
Dear Mike Frysinger,
In message 200904271200.39319.vap...@gentoo.org you wrote:
- * We need a wrapper for gunzip() because the parameters are
+ * We need a wrapper for zunzip() because the parameters are
* incompatible with the lzo decompressor.
*/
static int
On Monday 27 April 2009 15:46:25 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message Mike Frysinger wrote:
- * We need a wrapper for gunzip() because the parameters are
+ * We need a wrapper for zunzip() because the parameters are
* incompatible with the lzo decompressor.
*/
static int
Dear Ricardo Ribalda Delgado,
In message aa76a2be0904270925kc67bf77i1b3f53c4afbc3...@mail.gmail.com you
wrote:
If the only purpose of zunzip() is to be used here, then why do we not
make the parameters fit the intended purpose, thus avoiding an
additional wrapper?
The purpose of
Dear Mike Frysinger,
In message 200904271644.33760.vap...@gentoo.org you wrote:
that should be a follow up change, but the wrapper already exists today
regardless of Ricardo's fixes. i dont think his changes should be held up
to
address that.
that direction should probably cover:
-
12 matches
Mail list logo
