From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58900) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SowRT-0002Dd-D2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 08:55:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SowRQ-0005xR-Qp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 08:54:54 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41560) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SowRQ-0005xE-Iy for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 08:54:52 -0400 Message-ID: <4FFD7790.20201@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:54:40 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5b88891d9683e0289cd8e24a999ac9d1fdb3fdb3.1341748181.git.blauwirbel@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/5] Avoid GCC extension ?: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Andreas Schwab Cc: blauwirbel@gmail.com, blueswirl@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Am 08.07.2012 14:09, schrieb Andreas Schwab: > blauwirbel@gmail.com writes: > >> + pstrcpy(bs->backing_format, sizeof(bs->backing_format), >> + backing_fmt ? backing_file : ""); > > s/backing_file/backing_fmt/ Which is why such changes are probably a bad idea. Even more so if they aren't scripted. Does this patch improve anything? Last time I checked, qemu only compiled on gcc anyway. Kevin