Re: [LINUX5250] Code cleanup and documenting

[Scott Klement <klemscot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This patch doesn't appear to work.   I did a rm -r tn5250, then a fresh
checkout from CVS.   When I try to run the patch I get this:

Hmm...  The next patch looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|diff -u --recursive tn5250-cvs-20020313/src/scs2pdf.c
tn5250/src/scs2pdf.c
|--- tn5250-cvs-20020313/src/scs2pdf.c  Wed Mar 13 19:43:11 2002
|+++ tn5250/src/scs2pdf.c       Wed Mar 13 19:43:28 2002
--------------------------
Patching file tn5250/src/scs2pdf.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 41.
Hunk #2 failed at 81.
Hunk #3 failed at 119.
Hunk #4 failed at 163.
Hunk #5 failed at 183.
Hunk #6 failed at 227.
Hunk #7 failed at 251.
Hunk #8 failed at 282.
Hunk #9 failed at 305.
Hunk #10 failed at 350.
Hunk #11 failed at 365.
Hunk #12 failed at 380.
Hunk #13 failed at 392.
Hunk #14 failed at 402.
Hunk #15 failed at 482.
Hunk #16 failed at 492.
Hunk #17 failed at 557.
Hunk #18 failed at 596.
Hunk #19 failed at 622.
19 out of 19 hunks failed--saving rejects to tn5250/src/scs2pdf.c.rej
done

Could you try applying your patch to a fresh checkout, and see if it
works for you?


On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, James Rich wrote:

> I removed some redundant code in scs2pdf.c and added comments to it to
> explain how it works.  I wanted to get this done before I got started on
> changing it to use the function pointers and structures that Scott has
> been talking about.  This way we should have something nice and clean (and
> working) before I go and break everything :)
>
> Get the patch at:
>
> http://www.eaerich.com/tn5250.diff
>
> It applies against current cvs.
>
> James Rich
> james@eaerich.com
>