Re: [LINUX5250] Code cleanup and documenting

[Scott Klement <klemscot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Errr...  Please disregard that last message.

I don't know how I did it, but I had the correct patch up on my screen
to read, but was trying to apply an old patch.  (whoops)

At any rate, your patch works, I'm just crazy :)


On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Scott Klement wrote:
>
> 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
> >