On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:57:51AM +0200, Vincent Torri wrote:
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009, Marc Andre Tanner wrote:
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 11:43:50PM +0200, Vincent Torri wrote:
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009, Marc Andre Tanner wrote:
This makes ecore-file useable without ecore-con.
better one :
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009, Marc Andre Tanner wrote:
Why do you think this one is better? It clutters the source with more
#ifdef's and if you add a new function you will have to remember to
add the check for BUILD_ECORE_CON.
because you removed API functions, which must exist, ecore_con
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009, Marc Andre Tanner wrote:
This makes ecore-file useable without ecore-con.
better one : http://pastebin.ca/1613582
is it working for you ?
Vincent
Signed-off-by: Marc Andre Tanner m...@brain-dump.org
---
src/lib/ecore_file/ecore_file_download.c | 16
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 11:43:50PM +0200, Vincent Torri wrote:
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009, Marc Andre Tanner wrote:
This makes ecore-file useable without ecore-con.
better one : http://pastebin.ca/1613582
Why do you think this one is better? It clutters the source with more
#ifdef's and if
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009, Marc Andre Tanner wrote:
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 11:43:50PM +0200, Vincent Torri wrote:
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009, Marc Andre Tanner wrote:
This makes ecore-file useable without ecore-con.
better one : http://pastebin.ca/1613582
Why do you think this one is better? It
