On 07/29/13 12:04 AM, Thomas Klausner wrote:
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 11:22:03AM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
On 07/27/13 12:17 AM, Thomas Klausner wrote:
No. I just took the patch as committed, but you're right, const for
both makes more sense -- attached.
@@ -321,11 +321,10 @@
WSReadInput(InputInfoPtr·pInfo)
}
static·void
-printWsType(char·*type,·char·*devname)
+printWsType(const·char·*type,·const·char·*name)
{
-····xf86Msg(X_PROBED,·"%s:·Keyboard·type:·%s\n",·devname,·type);·
+····xf86Msg(X_PROBED,·"%s:·Keyboard·type:·%s\n",·name,·type);
}
#endif
Reviewed-by: Alan Coopersmith <[email protected]>
Thanks!
Do I add this and the other "Reviewed-by" with 'git amend' to my patch
set manually, or is there a better way?
For a single patch, I just do 'git commit --amend'.
For a small series of patches, I do 'git rebase -i origin' and the 'reword'
option.
For a large series of patches, I know that 'git filter-branch' can do it,
but I use it so rarely I have to go read the docs & google search every
time.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- [email protected]
Oracle Solaris Engineering - http://blogs.oracle.com/alanc
_______________________________________________
[email protected]: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
