Pavel Tsekov wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2006, Roland Illig wrote:
Roland Illig wrote:
The quoting hid one bug that appeared due to one variable being used,
which had never been defined before. I think it has been fixed upstream.
It has, and I updated our version of ls-mntd-fs.m4 to the one of
On Tue, 30 May 2006, Roland Illig wrote:
Pavel Tsekov wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2006, Roland Illig wrote:
Roland Illig wrote:
The quoting hid one bug that appeared due to one variable being used,
which had never been defined before. I think it has been fixed upstream.
It has, and I updated
On Tue, 30 May 2006, Roland Illig wrote:
Pavel Tsekov wrote:
I told you already. There is an existing macro in acinclude.m4 -
AC_GET_FS_INFO. Move your changes there - and some of the test you
introduced for header files and functions are unnecessary since the
code in AC_GET_FS_INFO already
Hello Pavel, Roland,
On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 14:00 +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
On Tue, 30 May 2006, Roland Illig wrote:
What about the files m4/fsusage.m4 and m4/lst-mntd-fs.m4? I think the code
belongs here instead of acinclude.m4.
What are you talking about ? AC_GET_FS_INFO is calling
Roland Illig wrote:
The quoting hid one bug that appeared due to one variable being used,
which had never been defined before. I think it has been fixed upstream.
It has, and I updated our version of ls-mntd-fs.m4 to the one of
coreutils. I also documented that in the ChangeLog. Sorry that it
On Mon, 29 May 2006, Roland Illig wrote:
Roland Illig wrote:
The quoting hid one bug that appeared due to one variable being used, which
had never been defined before. I think it has been fixed upstream.
It has, and I updated our version of ls-mntd-fs.m4 to the one of coreutils. I
also
Hi Roland,
You didn't add a change log entry for your quote fixes(?), only a CVS
log entry. Could you add one?
Are these variables really worth quoting? They seem to be either yes
or no. If they are worth quoting you might want to report this to the
coreutils maintainers.
Leonard.
--
mount -t
