On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 11:25:10AM +0200, ko...@upyum.com wrote:
> Peter Bex wrote:
> > I think this isn't entirely correct; your code returns either
> > # or whatever C_fseek returns. The wrapping "unless"
> > will thus see # if the when's condition is false.
> > […]
> > though I don't really
Peter Bex wrote:
> I think this isn't entirely correct; your code returns either
> # or whatever C_fseek returns. The wrapping "unless"
> will thus see # if the when's condition is false.
> […]
> though I don't really like the nested (and ... (begin ...)).
Woops! Indeed!
Here’s a new patch. Do
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 12:54:33PM +0200, ko...@upyum.com wrote:
> The subject explains it all. I think that’s the correct thing to do.
>
> This fixes the tailf example of the inotify egg.
> --- a/posix-common.scm
> +++ b/posix-common.scm
> @@ -357,8 +357,9 @@ EOF
>(##sys#check-fixnum
The subject explains it all. I think that’s the correct thing to do.
This fixes the tailf example of the inotify egg.
>From f865dfc57978ffe97501bb0edd2097179a26e365 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kooda
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 12:49:22 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Reset port EOF flag when seeking
---
