From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Walton Subject: (unknown) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 17:32:20 -0500 Message-ID: <1328481141-21037-1-git-send-email-bwalton@artsci.utoronto.ca> References: <7vr4y9ggij.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> To: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Feb 05 23:34:11 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RuAev-0002eq-St for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2012 23:34:10 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754793Ab2BEWd7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Feb 2012 17:33:59 -0500 Received: from garcia.cquest.utoronto.ca ([192.82.128.9]:32974 "EHLO garcia.cquest.utoronto.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753842Ab2BEWd6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Feb 2012 17:33:58 -0500 Received: from pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca ([128.100.160.254]:51389 ident=93) by garcia.cquest.utoronto.ca with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1RuAej-0007mc-Gu; Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:33:57 -0500 Received: from bwalton by pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RuAej-0005Zk-Fy; Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:33:57 -0500 Subject: X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.4.1 In-Reply-To: <7vr4y9ggij.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi Junio, > > diff --git a/compat/inet_ntop.c b/compat/inet_ntop.c > > index 60b5a1d..f1bf81c 100644 > > --- a/compat/inet_ntop.c > > +++ b/compat/inet_ntop.c > > @@ -15,11 +15,9 @@ > > * SOFTWARE. > > */ > > > > +#include "../git-compat-util.h" > > #include > > #include > > - > > -#include "../git-compat-util.h" > > - > > #include > > #include > > I actually have to wonder if any of these four inclusion of the > system headers are warranted. Wouldn't they be included as part of > git-compat-util.h anyway? Yes, you're correct. Dropping the system includes is correct as opposed to rearranging the order. Updated patch to follow. Thanks -Ben