All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
diff for duplicates of <46B062AF.1040907@student.ltu.se>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 712312f..406a703 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -13,19 +13,19 @@ Mike Frysinger wrote:
 >>> would be able to pick it out as i'm not familiar with what level that
 >>> thing runs at
 >>>       
->> Didn't he mean "x = NULL" > "!x"?
+>> Didn't he mean "x == NULL" > "!x"?
 >>     
 >
 > i'm sure i understand your meaning of ">" ... are you saying that "x
-> = NULL" is greater (preferred) to "!x" or are you saying that "x =
+> == NULL" is greater (preferred) to "!x" or are you saying that "x ==
 > NULL" should be changed to "!x" ?
 >   
 If I understood Robin correctly, he suggested that checkpatch.pl would 
-tell to convert "x = NULL" to "!x", if that would be the preferred way.
+tell to convert "x == NULL" to "!x", if that would be the preferred way.
 > i dont think the former case can be checked by checkpatch.pl, but the
 > latter certainly can ... but i'd be very skeptical you could get the
-> wider LKML audience to sign off one way or the other wrt to "x =
-> NULL" vs "!x".  you can certainly get people to sign off on "x = 0"
+> wider LKML audience to sign off one way or the other wrt to "x ==
+> NULL" vs "!x".  you can certainly get people to sign off on "x == 0"
 > being wrong when x is a pointer.
 >   
 I agree!
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index abfb7e3..c7d311e 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
  "ref\08bd0f97a0708010303j7f443b06lf9d77f6d36816237@mail.gmail.com\0"
  "From\0Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>\0"
  "Subject\0Re: [PATCH 06/68] 0 -> NULL, for arch/frv\0"
- "Date\0Wed, 01 Aug 2007 10:38:39 +0000\0"
+ "Date\0Wed, 01 Aug 2007 12:38:39 +0200\0"
  "To\0Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@gmail.com>\0"
  "Cc\0Robin Getz <rgetz@blackfin.uclinux.org>"
   Yoann Padioleau <padator@wanadoo.fr>
@@ -32,19 +32,19 @@
  ">>> would be able to pick it out as i'm not familiar with what level that\n"
  ">>> thing runs at\n"
  ">>>       \n"
- ">> Didn't he mean \"x = NULL\" > \"!x\"?\n"
+ ">> Didn't he mean \"x == NULL\" > \"!x\"?\n"
  ">>     \n"
  ">\n"
  "> i'm sure i understand your meaning of \">\" ... are you saying that \"x\n"
- "> = NULL\" is greater (preferred) to \"!x\" or are you saying that \"x =\n"
+ "> == NULL\" is greater (preferred) to \"!x\" or are you saying that \"x ==\n"
  "> NULL\" should be changed to \"!x\" ?\n"
  ">   \n"
  "If I understood Robin correctly, he suggested that checkpatch.pl would \n"
- "tell to convert \"x = NULL\" to \"!x\", if that would be the preferred way.\n"
+ "tell to convert \"x == NULL\" to \"!x\", if that would be the preferred way.\n"
  "> i dont think the former case can be checked by checkpatch.pl, but the\n"
  "> latter certainly can ... but i'd be very skeptical you could get the\n"
- "> wider LKML audience to sign off one way or the other wrt to \"x =\n"
- "> NULL\" vs \"!x\".  you can certainly get people to sign off on \"x = 0\"\n"
+ "> wider LKML audience to sign off one way or the other wrt to \"x ==\n"
+ "> NULL\" vs \"!x\".  you can certainly get people to sign off on \"x == 0\"\n"
  "> being wrong when x is a pointer.\n"
  ">   \n"
  "I agree!\n"
@@ -53,4 +53,4 @@
  "\n"
  Richard Knutsson
 
-eae5b702a73b9d5e2141d0bffe5b0fe7bb69b59d38203d1f646ed83a167d6c59
+4223696a80fed721fde4d8cf47fa94a7371993bf1351c2a2ffe70e67cd2aa667

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.