Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix OSX compilation by explicitly declaring flock as struct (fix #40) #43

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 6, 2015

Conversation

blahah
Copy link
Contributor

@blahah blahah commented Jan 15, 2015

No description provided.

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/snap-prb/6/
Test FAILed.

@blahah
Copy link
Contributor Author

blahah commented May 6, 2015

Devs, is there anything in particular holding up this PR, and #32 and #47? These are all very small, simple changes that improve correctness or compatibility.

@bolosky
Copy link
Contributor

bolosky commented May 6, 2015

Just that I don’t have a mac to test them on. I’ll eyeball them and hope it’s all OK.

From: Richard Smith-Unna [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2015 6:50 AM
To: amplab/snap
Subject: Re: [snap] fix OSX compilation by explicitly declaring flock as struct (fix #40) (#43)

Devs, is there anything in particular holding up this PR, and #32#32 and #47#47? These are all very small, simple changes that improve correctness or compatibility.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/43#issuecomment-99467130.

@bolosky bolosky merged commit 80c7cc6 into amplab:dev May 6, 2015
@bolosky
Copy link
Contributor

bolosky commented May 6, 2015

I merged #47. We’re about to integrate dev to master, so since #47 includes #32, I’ll just skip it for now.

--Bill

From: Richard Smith-Unna [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2015 6:50 AM
To: amplab/snap
Subject: Re: [snap] fix OSX compilation by explicitly declaring flock as struct (fix #40) (#43)

Devs, is there anything in particular holding up this PR, and #32#32 and #47#47? These are all very small, simple changes that improve correctness or compatibility.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/43#issuecomment-99467130.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants