as i'm preparing an updated Debian package for pd-osc, it would also be nice if you could bump the version-number to *0.2* in osc-meta.pd.
or do you prefer a date-based versioning scheme, like *0.1.20141108* ? On 11/08/2014 02:41 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > > > > --- > > ** [bugs:#1168] packOSC: fix some build-warnings** > > **Status:** open > **Group:** v0.46 > **Labels:** osc build > **Created:** Sat Nov 08, 2014 01:41 PM UTC by IOhannes m zmölnig > **Last Updated:** Sat Nov 08, 2014 01:41 PM UTC > **Owner:** Martin Peach > > the attached patch fixes a number of (minor) issues. > > - remove a number of unused variables (or move them into the `#ifdef block` > where they are used) > > - cast to `unsigned int` before printing a `size_t` (and use `%u` rather than > `%i`) > > - `t_int` should (despite it's name) only be used for the dsp-chain, not for > generic integer types. use `int` instead; cf > [pd-dev](http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/2014-06/019871.html) > > > > --- > > Sent from sourceforge.net because [email protected] is subscribed to > https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/ > > To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at > https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/admin/bugs/options. Or, if this is a > mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
