-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 169
Updates to InitForKernel
#342
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
Open
GrayJack
wants to merge
5
commits into
pspdev:master
Choose a base branch
from
GrayJack:update/init
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
c82edf3
refactor(init): Update function names on `InitForKernel` stub
GrayJack f63612e
refactor(init): Update function name in header
GrayJack e16695a
feat(init): Add `sceKernelQueryInitCB` in the `pspinit.h` header
GrayJack eec442c
refactor: diff
GrayJack 6bc1358
refactor: Remove ifdef with firmware version
GrayJack File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i'm staring at this and other similar hunks and fail to see any change - probably replaced a tab with a space or vice versa ?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That is weird, this was not in the git diff and I did not change a single thing on this besides the function name changes. Maybe GitHub is using a different diff algo?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This same thing hapenned on line 37 on Makefile.am
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
unlikely. could it be that you use a mac or windows pc and newlines
\nwere replaced with\ror\r\n, only on lines you touched ?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, I am on macOS, but my editor for sure in configured with LF line ending
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it's the other way round - your editor replaced existing CRLF with LF. to find out
i condensed your commits into a single one (git rebase -i) and made a format-patch, which i then opened with hexedit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Then it makes sense this diff, although it sure is not showing in the diff localy. Btw, it doesn't make sense, so far all files I tweaked (not only the ones I made PR), all of them are LF, why a random file is CRLF?
I'll "fix" this tomorrow. Thanks for finding this issue
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
that's likely because this PR consists of like 5 separate commits, i didnt see it either before i squashed them all together.
i think the file is a mix of CRLF and LF, most editors and tools don't care about it so it flies below the radar, but when a line is touched or added that line is changed to the editor's default. fixing it (to keep diffs minimal) either requires using a hexeditor that can insert new bytes at arbitrary positions such as hexedit, or squashing the commits into one like i did, and either 1) creating a format-patch, and removing the hunks with the line-end changes with an editor, then deleting the old commits and applying the patch, or 2) unstage the changes, and selectively re-adding hunks with
git add --patch, which is likely more practical since the text gui allows to shrink hunks that span over multiple blocks withs.