Re: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?)

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Andy Whitcroft
Date: Monday, February 11, 2008 - 11:42 am

On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 06:58:08PM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote:

Ok, I guess thats fair criticism.  Could you check out the current
checkpatch-next (0.14-8-g3737366 or later -9, -10 etc), and see if
that works.  It seems to on the simple examples you sent me :).

Thanks.

-apw
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?), Marcin Slusarz, (Sun Feb 10, 7:33 am)
Re: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?), Andy Whitcroft, (Mon Feb 11, 3:23 am)
Re: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?), Benny Halevy, (Mon Feb 11, 9:05 am)
Re: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?), Andy Whitcroft, (Mon Feb 11, 9:40 am)
Re: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?), Benny Halevy, (Mon Feb 11, 9:58 am)
Re: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?), Marcin Slusarz, (Mon Feb 11, 11:09 am)
Re: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?), Andy Whitcroft, (Mon Feb 11, 11:42 am)
Re: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?), Benny Halevy, (Tue Feb 12, 1:21 am)
Re: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?), Jan Engelhardt, (Wed Feb 13, 12:43 pm)
Re: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?), Andy Whitcroft, (Thu Feb 14, 3:06 am)
Re: bug in checkpatch (on pointers to typedefs?), Jan Engelhardt, (Thu Feb 14, 11:29 am)