Re: another undo patch: a feature request and implementation, should it be of interest

["Joel K. Pettersson" <joelkpettersson@xxxxxxxxx>]

> This patch does not change the usage notice nor documentation, so this
> remains to do. (and perhaps stylistic or other changes if the code is
> not up to your standards or I messed up somewhere)

I did mess something up, namely parameter handling of new option in
main() - the kludge around getopt was incomplete, and so, while the
use examples in the previous mail would work, reordering them like
this wouldn't:

undo -d -3 -2

Instead, that became equivalent to:

undo -d -32

This fixed in new patch.

-- 
 -  Joel K. Pettersson

Attachment: undo.patch
Description: Binary data