| 1 |
On 10/28/10 7:42 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
>>>>> Il giorno lun, 25/10/2010 alle 18.50 -0300, Alexis Ballier ha scritto: |
| 3 |
>>>>>> Am I missing something obvious or is it just hiding a bug in the |
| 4 |
>>>>>> linux |
| 5 |
>>>>>> headers? I see no usage of INT_MAX in the patched .c file... |
| 6 |
>>>>> |
| 7 |
> the maintainer already has done his due diligence and reviewed the |
| 8 |
> field. at this point, it is *you* who disagrees with the situation |
| 9 |
> thus it is *you* who needs to resolve *your* complaint. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Just curious: what are the technical reasons for that? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
My understanding is that one header depends on another for proper |
| 14 |
compilation but doesn't #include it. Is that correct? |
Archives