Fwd: Re: about patch descriptions

Matthias Benkmann matthias at winterdrache.de
Fri Oct 18 15:33:46 PDT 2002

On Fri, 18 Oct 2002 16:19:02 -0600 Gerard Beekmans
<gerard at linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:

> ----------  Forwarded Message  ----------
> Subject: Re: about patch descriptions
> Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 18:01:09 -0400
> From: jsmaby at virgo.umeche.maine.edu
>  patching, and no patches are available.  If people are taught how
>  certain errors are fixed, they'll be able to diagnose and fix (without
>  any real C knowledge either) many compile errors.
> For example, in findutils (or was it fileutils), there are some
> prototype mismatches, so in the patch description, say that without the
> patch, the compiler will die on "Error, conflicting prototype in
> oldcode.c:33", or something like that.  The error is fixed by commenting
> out that line in oldcode.c.  You could delve into why "int stdfoo();"
> was declared in the first place, and why it conflicts with glibc's
> headers, but maybe that's just an excersize for programers and code
> maintainers.

I've worked as a tutor for computer science students in a Unix system
programming course in C. And even among those students I don't think there
were many who could have fixed even "simple" errors as you describe in
someone else's code. And I mean *after* getting through the whole course
successfully. Someone who can fix errors in C code after reading just a
few patch explanations in the LFS book would have to be a Kwisatz Haderach
of a coder.


Who is this General Failure,
and why is he reading my disk ?

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list