On 8/2/13 7:34 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
On 7/10/13 11:12 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 07:49:53PM +0100, Filipe David Borba Manana wrote:
The module cmds-restore.c was defining its own next_leaf()
function, which did exactly the same as btrfs_next_leaf()
from ctree.c.
This
On 7/10/13 11:12 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 07:49:53PM +0100, Filipe David Borba Manana wrote:
The module cmds-restore.c was defining its own next_leaf()
function, which did exactly the same as btrfs_next_leaf()
from ctree.c.
This has been removed by Eric's patch
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 07:49:53PM +0100, Filipe David Borba Manana wrote:
The module cmds-restore.c was defining its own next_leaf()
function, which did exactly the same as btrfs_next_leaf()
from ctree.c.
This has been removed by Eric's patch present in the integration
branches:
Btrfs-progs:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 5:12 PM, David Sterba dste...@suse.cz wrote:
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 07:49:53PM +0100, Filipe David Borba Manana wrote:
The module cmds-restore.c was defining its own next_leaf()
function, which did exactly the same as btrfs_next_leaf()
from ctree.c.
This has been
The module cmds-restore.c was defining its own next_leaf()
function, which did exactly the same as btrfs_next_leaf()
from ctree.c.
Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana fdman...@gmail.com
---
cmds-restore.c | 62 +---
1 file changed, 5
