Re: mg: prompt for revert on dirty buffer

2012-10-14 Thread Florian Obser
Updated diff, on pressing the wrong key the prompt should be Please answer y, n or r. pointed out by lum@, thanks! diff --git buffer.c buffer.c index 60076bb..6bce870 100644 --- buffer.c +++ buffer.c @@ -856,11 +856,18 @@ checkdirty(struct buffer *bp) bp->b_flag |= BFD

¡SE BUSCAN LÍDERES!

2012-10-14 Thread Aurelio Fernandez
Una Oportunidad que no te recomendamos que dejes pasar. ¡La Próxima gran Red de Ganancias para TODOS! * Oportunidad Online de Ingreso Global. * ¡Disponible en 130 Paises! * 10 Productos de Comunicación por Video de Proxima Generación que tienen emocionantes beneficios Personales y d

p108 Re: "smaller" make patch, to test p107

2012-10-14 Thread Marc Espie
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 06:49:34PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > millert@ already saw all of this. > This solves a few minor/major problems. > > - Theo wants no blank line at end of ^C error messages. This blank line > actually comes from the shell/tty, so we have to refrain printing out the > last

"smaller" make patch, to test p107

2012-10-14 Thread Marc Espie
millert@ already saw all of this. This solves a few minor/major problems. - Theo wants no blank line at end of ^C error messages. This blank line actually comes from the shell/tty, so we have to refrain printing out the last \n in that situation. - make sure errors go thru handle_all_signals(),

Re: Scheduler improvements, take 1001, Patch 2/5

2012-10-14 Thread Bob Beck
Gregor you would perhaps get better feedback if it were easier to discern where your patches are and what each one is doing. If you can't be inclined to keep the subjects matching the diffs and are sending stuff out with subjects like "scheduler improvement diff X" instead of something like "reduc

Re: Scheduler improvements, take 1001, Patch 2/5

2012-10-14 Thread Gregor Best
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:05:36AM +0200, David Coppa wrote: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Gregor Best wrote: > > This patch simply halves the timeslice processes get until they are > > preempted. This patch is standalone and the rest of the patches does not > > depend on it, but I figured I'd

Re: Scheduler improvements, take 1001, Patch 2/5

2012-10-14 Thread David Coppa
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Gregor Best wrote: > This patch simply halves the timeslice processes get until they are > preempted. This patch is standalone and the rest of the patches does not > depend on it, but I figured I'd throw it in anyway. > > -- > Gregor Best > Didn't get this patc