On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 21:04 +0200, Bardur Arantsson wrote:
> I can't be bothered to open up a bug report, but I've attached a trivial 
> patch.

...

> I think the logic in there still looks suspect though: AFAICT there may 
> be other scenarios than the one I accidentally tried where 'unpack' may 
> remain True while unpack_cmd does not get set to anything meaningful. 
> With my patch this will result in the new error message as well -- I'm 
> not sure how appropriate that is.
> 
> Anyway, the patch certainly certainly shouldn't cause any regressions.
> The new message only triggers when an undefined variable would be 
> accessed anyway.

I'll have to test it.  It sure would be nice if there were a bug report
for this so that I didn't lose this email in all of my pre-release
hustle.  Maybe I'll happen to remember this email when I get to doing
catalyst testing again.  Who knows...

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to