Would anyone have strong objections if I go through and make some patches to remove system includes where I can't see any evidence that any code now in that file still needs that header?
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 03:39:56PM +0000, corvid wrote:
Would anyone have strong objections if I go through and make some patches to remove system includes where I can't see any evidence that any code now in that file still needs that header?
OK, but please test is still works on the different platforms. -- Cheers Jorge.-
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 12:08:06PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 03:39:56PM +0000, corvid wrote:
Would anyone have strong objections if I go through and make some patches to remove system includes where I can't see any evidence that any code now in that file still needs that header?
OK, but please test is still works on the different platforms.
I'm all for it and will be happy to test it on DragonFly BSD. Cheers, Johannes
Johannes wrote:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 12:08:06PM -0400, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 03:39:56PM +0000, corvid wrote:
Would anyone have strong objections if I go through and make some patches to remove system includes where I can't see any evidence that any code now in that file still needs that header?
OK, but please test is still works on the different platforms.
I'm all for it and will be happy to test it on DragonFly BSD.
Oh, good, because I was looking around at my extensive collection of...one computer...that I can't easily put OSes on, thinking, "Well, so much for that idea..."
participants (3)
-
corvid＠lavabit.com -
jcid＠dillo.org -
Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de