From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1097359336897758880==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Denis Kenzior Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Core support for packet switched bearer reporting Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:19:53 -0600 Message-ID: <4D2B31A9.70202@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201101101333.31577.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============1097359336897758880== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi R=C3=A9mi, On 01/10/2011 05:33 AM, R=C3=A9mi Denis-Courmont wrote: > On Friday 07 January 2011 18:25:32 ext Denis Kenzior, you wrote: >> Hi R=C3=A9mi, >> >> On 01/07/2011 10:02 AM, R=C3=A9mi Denis-Courmont wrote: >>> --- >>> >>> include/gprs.h | 2 ++ >>> src/gprs.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> please see the 'Submitting patches' section in HACKING > = > The rules are self-contradictory. Either the patch spreads multiple = > directories, or it breaks compilation. > = They are really not. For 99% of the time you need to break up your patches like this and it works out nicely. > For the sake of git-bisect'ing, I'd rather not break compilation. > = What are you talking about? Adding a function declaration that nobody yet calls is not going to break compilation or git bisect. Regards, -Denis --===============1097359336897758880==--