From owner-freebsd-audit Thu May 3 23:52:35 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-audit@freebsd.org Received: from ringworld.nanolink.com (ringworld.nanolink.com [195.24.48.13]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0136837B43C for ; Thu, 3 May 2001 23:52:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from roam@orbitel.bg) Received: (qmail 16563 invoked by uid 1000); 4 May 2001 06:50:41 -0000 Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 09:50:41 +0300 From: Peter Pentchev To: audit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: du(1) -I option to ignore files/dirs Message-ID: <20010504095041.C13382@ringworld.oblivion.bg> Mail-Followup-To: audit@FreeBSD.org References: <20010428194259.J415@ringworld.oblivion.bg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from mheffner@vt.edu on Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 05:46:49PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG ..and a resounding silence on the list.. Does this mean that I can go ahead and commit the patch, with an Approved by: mikeh & silence on -audit? :) Guess not :) G'luck, Peter -- I am the meaning of this sentence. On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 05:46:49PM -0400, Mike Heffner wrote: > > On 28-Apr-2001 Peter Pentchev wrote: > | Hi, > | > | And just when -arch thought they'd gotten rid of me and my du(1) patches.. ;) > | > | Well, since no one had any real objections to adding the -I flag, other than > | 'no one else is doing that' (so why can't we?), and as several people agreed > | that there was no easy (or moderately hard) way to do this with other utils, > | here's an updated patch that properly uses slist's instead of the constant- > | sized arrays in the previous version. > > Looks good > > | > | + > | +int > | +ignorep(ent) > | + FTSENT *ent; > | +{ > | + struct ignentry *ign; > | + > | + if (SLIST_EMPTY(&ignores)) > | + return 0; > > This isn't needed though because it's caught in the _FOREACH. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message