Fix the function names mentioned in libext2fs documentation.
==================================================================
Signed-off-by: "Manish Katiyar" <[email protected]>
---
doc/libext2fs.texinfo | 6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/libext2fs.texinfo b/doc/libext2fs.texinfo
index e93a555..549d66e 100644
--- a/doc/libext2fs.texinfo
+++ b/doc/libext2fs.texinfo
@@ -561,7 +561,7 @@ and return to the caller.
@deftypefun errcode_t ext2fs_block_iterate2 (ext2_filsys @var{fs},
ext2_ino_t @var{ino}, int @var{flags}, char *@var{block}_buf, int
(*func)(ext2_filsys @var{fs}, blk_t *@var{blocknr}, e2_blkcnt_t
@var{blockcnt}, blk_t @var{ref_blk}, int @var{ref_offset}, void
*@var{private}), void *@var{private})
-This function is much like @code{ext2fs_block_iterate2}, except that the
+This function is much like @code{ext2fs_block_iterate}, except that the
@var{blockcnt} type is a 64-bit signed quantity, to support larger
files, and the addition of the @var{ref_blk} and @var{ref_offset}
arguments passed to the callback function, which identify the location
@@ -590,7 +590,7 @@ inode structure.
Returns 0 if @var{ino} is a directory, and @code{ENOTDIR} if it is not.
@end deftypefun
-@deftypefun int ext2_inode_has_valid_blocks (struct ext2_inode *@var{inode})
+@deftypefun int ext2fs_inode_has_valid_blocks (struct ext2_inode *@var{inode})
Returns 1 if the inode's block entries actually valid block entries, and
0 if not. Inodes which represent devices and fast symbolic links do not
@@ -1186,7 +1186,7 @@ intended for debugging and testing use only.
@deftypefun errcode_t ext2fs_check_desc (ext2_filsys @var{fs})
@end deftypefun
-@deftypefun errcode_t ext2_get_num_dirs (ext2_filsys @var{fs},
ext2_ino_t *@var{ret_num_dirs})
+@deftypefun errcode_t ext2fs_get_num_dirs (ext2_filsys @var{fs},
ext2_ino_t *@var{ret_num_dirs})
@end deftypefun
--
1.5.4.3
==================================================================
Thanks -
Manish
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 12:38:40AM +0530, Manish Katiyar wrote:
> Fix the function names mentioned in libext2fs documentation.
Thanks, applied.
BTW, in the future, I'd appreciate it if you don't include a
separating line made with equal characters between the patch
description and the Signed-off-by:
>
> ==================================================================
>
Also, your mail reader seems to be corrupting patches by line-wrapping
them at around 72 colums (i.e., adding new-lines to break up long
lines in the patch). I had to manually fix up your patch so it would
be accepted.
Could you look into changing the settings of your mail program?
Thanks for doing all of your patches!!
- Ted