On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 06:21:03AM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> Why do you submit another change? I already submitted one, and I am happy
> to update it if the maintainer requests any change? 

I'd misread your response "the important thing is to fix the build break"
to John Spencer's comment as "if you want it done that way, send a patch
quick".

> This feels a bit unwelcoming. ;)
For which I apologize (as well as for the misunderstanding).
 
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Isaac Dunham <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > (rather than gratuitously copying every kernel-speific int type.)
> > ---
> >  util-linux/fatattr.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/util-linux/fatattr.c b/util-linux/fatattr.c
> > index 0f8d632..5d93387 100644
> > --- a/util-linux/fatattr.c
> > +++ b/util-linux/fatattr.c
> > @@ -34,8 +34,8 @@
> >  #include "libbb.h"
> >  /* linux/msdos_fs.h says: */
> >  #ifndef FAT_IOCTL_GET_ATTRIBUTES
> > -# define FAT_IOCTL_GET_ATTRIBUTES        _IOR('r', 0x10, __u32)
> > -# define FAT_IOCTL_SET_ATTRIBUTES        _IOW('r', 0x11, __u32)
> > +# define FAT_IOCTL_GET_ATTRIBUTES        _IOR('r', 0x10, uint32_t)
> > +# define FAT_IOCTL_SET_ATTRIBUTES        _IOW('r', 0x11, uint32_t)
> >  #endif
> >
> >  /* Currently supports only the FAT flags, not the NTFS ones.
> > --
> > 2.0.1
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox

Reply via email to