Re: [PATCH v2] Submodule merge support

From: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: May 21, 2007, 07:37 UTC
Message-ID: <20070521073758.GP3141@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070521073253.GU5412@admingilde.org>

Martin Waitz <tali@admingilde.org> wrote:

Show 21 quoted lines

> On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 02:20:05AM -0400, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> > > @@ -574,6 +575,21 @@ static void update_file_flags(const unsigned char *sha,
> > >  		void *buf;
> > >  		unsigned long size;
> > >  
> > > +		if (S_ISDIRLNK(mode)) {
> > > +			/* defer dirlinks to another process, don't try to */
> > > +			/* read the object "sha" here */
> > > +			const char *dirlink_checkout[] = {
> > > +				"dirlink-checkout", path, sha1_to_hex(sha), NULL
> > > +			};
> > > +			struct child_process cmd = {
> > > +				.argv = dirlink_checkout,
> > > +				.git_cmd = 1,
> > > +			};
> > 
> > My Solaris 9 system cannot compile this syntax, even though it is
> > a clean way to initalize the child_process.
> 
> any special thing it does not like in the above code or does it just
> not support structs that are initialized that way?

Its a very old Sun C compiler, and it doesn't like structs to be initialized that way. Yes, newer compilers are better, and gcc is also better, but I'm unable to get our UNIX admins to actually do their job and keep systems usable by the users.

/me starts to wonder why he continues with this day-job thing...

-- 
Shawn.