This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH updated] Use a proper C tokenizer to implement the obsolete typedefs test.
- From: Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>
- To: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 06:38:24 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH updated] Use a proper C tokenizer to implement the obsolete typedefs test.
- References: <20190218143920.20885-1-zackw@panix.com> <mvmbm36mmiq.fsf@suse.de> <CAKCAbMj9yxoWWJdEngYDMgvQS8ZgZqYfNU1=_5xWHaN7NZx1Bw@mail.gmail.com> <mvm1s41mps0.fsf@suse.de>
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 4:53 AM Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> wrote:
> On Feb 20 2019, Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:51 AM Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> wrote:
> >> On Feb 18 2019, Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > * bits/types.h (__SQUAD_TYPE, __S64_TYPE): Define as __int64_t.
> >> > (__UQUAD_TYPE, __U64_TYPE): Define as __uint64_t.
> >> > Update commentary.
> >> > * sys/types.h (__u_intN_t): Remove.
> >>
> >> These files are both in posix/.
> >
> > I understand what you are trying to communicate here, but someone with
> > less experience would not necessarily realize that you were pointing
> > out that these change log entries refer to the files by the wrong
> > pathnames. Would it kill you to be a little more specific?
>
> That's exactly what I did.
Are you being deliberately obtuse?
zw