From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Markus Duft Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] add support for the SUA layer (interix; windows) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:27:44 +0200 Message-ID: <4CCA5B50.2040208@gentoo.org> References: <1288168793-11159-1-git-send-email-markus.duft@salomon.at> <1288168793-11159-2-git-send-email-markus.duft@salomon.at> <7veib99608.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Erik Faye-Lund To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Oct 29 07:51:47 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PBhsR-0002kl-Av for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:51:47 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753409Ab0J2Fvm (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2010 01:51:42 -0400 Received: from smtp.salomon.at ([193.186.16.13]:50645 "EHLO sauxb.salomon.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752484Ab0J2Fvl (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2010 01:51:41 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 1308 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 01:51:40 EDT Received: from servex01.wamas.com (servex01.salomon.at [172.28.2.2]) by sauxb.salomon.at (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id o9T5Smh9029785; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:28:48 +0200 (METDST) Received: from [172.28.8.166] ([172.28.8.166]) by servex01.wamas.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:28:48 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100913 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.3 In-Reply-To: <7veib99608.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Oct 2010 05:28:48.0351 (UTC) FILETIME=[29C836F0:01CB772A] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.54 on 172.28.2.13 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 10/29/2010 02:50 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > mduft@s01en22.salomon.at writes: [snip] > > It would be much nicer to do this: > > #ifdef NO_INITGROUPS > #define initgroups(x,y) (0) /* nothing */ > #endif > > near the beginning of the file. That would make life of people who have > changes in flight that would touch the same area of the code a lot easier. ok, i see the point, thanks for your suggestion! I'll change this. may i ask where i should send v3 of the patch so it gets processed further? just the ml again, or is there a specific maintainer i should send this to? regards, thanks for the help :) Markus