lcdproc: remove patch rejected upstream
Remove an lcdproc patch which has been rejected upstream. It has been decided by lcdproc developer Markus Dolze that the behaviour of the client_add_key command when handling the minus key is "intentional to some degree." This patch also takes the opportunity to remove the version number from the single remaining lcdproc patch. Signed-off-by: Simon Dawson <spdawson@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@sunsite.dk>
This commit is contained in:
parent
ffdb08d221
commit
a5004bcab1
|
@ -1,38 +0,0 @@
|
||||||
Calling client_add_key as follows
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
client_add_key -
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
will fail. However using an explicit -shared option, like this:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
client_add_key -shared -
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
will succeed. This is caused by a failure to parse the - key token, which is
|
|
||||||
mistaken for the first character of an option argument.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The client_add_key command also returns a spurious "success" message when a
|
|
||||||
malformed option is supplied.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
This patch fixes both issues.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Signed-off-by: Simon Dawson <spdawson@gmail.com>
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
diff -Nurp a/server/commands/client_commands.c b/server/commands/client_commands.c
|
|
||||||
--- a/server/commands/client_commands.c 2011-08-14 13:29:16.000000000 +0100
|
|
||||||
+++ b/server/commands/client_commands.c 2012-10-05 07:50:40.357795535 +0100
|
|
||||||
@@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ client_add_key_func(Client *c, int argc,
|
|
||||||
}
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
argnr = 1;
|
|
||||||
- if (argv[argnr][0] == '-') {
|
|
||||||
+ if (argv[argnr][0] == '-' && strcmp(argv[argnr], "-") != 0) {
|
|
||||||
if (strcmp( argv[argnr], "-shared") == 0) {
|
|
||||||
exclusively = 0;
|
|
||||||
}
|
|
||||||
@@ -190,6 +190,7 @@ client_add_key_func(Client *c, int argc,
|
|
||||||
}
|
|
||||||
else {
|
|
||||||
sock_printf_error(c->sock, "Invalid option: %s\n", argv[argnr]);
|
|
||||||
+ return 0;
|
|
||||||
}
|
|
||||||
argnr++;
|
|
||||||
}
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user