Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: Next zsh release
- X-seq: zsh-workers 29326
- From: Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Next zsh release
- Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 18:49:20 +0200
- Cc: Peter Stephenson <Peter.Stephenson@xxxxxxx>, "Zsh Hackers' List" <zsh-workers@xxxxxxx>
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=xQo+nYHznQF1HSU3qsX4uDVFiTILdYskZT8Am0cnAe4=; b=cfeJRsNWI1Kao/YS50m7w84Ez2luX3R7i97r0XilYhaFRKrcHjHLr/N1FYS5p5SwUP feiGZd8YJ7OwIX/6Z4kYPKTlV2nkk4roFPkLNxhKY1sImKcCd2y58UGi2BMiUPL6+KQh pIAdmbqWdA+RM4lgT098iRCPcygOH58elJSgY=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=bGFf/9u0c6/hwWKqI4rL1RDYUT+50cOtVYf0V3VCY6k9f3gz95iGLZVhnPNz65XPPN Tl4/mVntbnipLecuXm0nzXooiBKTAlvfCWXcKIhqXgpyNwl3PslnPRD2c+aUNC/KcvnH bNK7R67PZd5mYlDSV9xuG9GvE8sy3eBl5EL/8=
- In-reply-to: <BANLkTinen5KwzxSoPtVd9=TG9AATvZFYkw@mail.gmail.com>
- List-help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
- List-id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
- List-post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <20110519140215.2879aeeb@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <BANLkTimMFRvw6a6wxPxA656KJ+_oommMLA@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTinen5KwzxSoPtVd9=TG9AATvZFYkw@mail.gmail.com>
On 19 May 2011 17:17, Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> PATCH: Remove some unused assignments/checks noticed by clang
>
> I'm really leery of this one. There were at least two cases someone
> spotted where the changes were wrong, weren't there? Seems like a bad
> thing to gamble on right before a release.
While trying to build statically to double check these changes, I
noticed this happens when building zftp statically:
In file included from zftp.c:54:
zftp.mdh:5:1: warning: "boot_" redefined
In file included from zftp.c:53:
tcp.mdh:5:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition
and so on for all those functions. It seems to work though, since the
files are included in the correct order.
--
Mikael Magnusson
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author