Patch to add the "-iname" option to find

[Bernhard Fischer]

On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 12:52:16PM +0100, Alexander Griesser wrote:
>Alexander Griesser wrote:
>>> What's the bloatcheck for this change?
>> 
>> Dunno. How to do that??
>> I found "scripts/bloat-o-meter" and used that for checking (if that's

Yes, that's what i ment.

>> suitable) and it reports (with your patch applied):
>> 
>> function                                             old     new   delta
>> .rodata                                            51208   51248     +40
>> -
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> (add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 1/0 up/down: 40/0)               Total: 40
>> bytes
>
>OK, I came up with a different patch that doesn't double code.
>Please review it.
>
>Oddly, bloat-o-meter reports the same delta...
>
>ciao,
>-- 
>Alexander Griesser (Netzwerkadministration)
>E-Mail: alexander.griesser at lkh-vil.or.at | Web: http://www.lkh-vil.or.at
>KABEG LKH Villach | Nikolaigasse 43 | 9500 Villach
>Tel.:   +43 4242 208 3061 | Fax.:   +43 4242 971 3061

>diff -Nur /tmp/old/findutils/find.c /tmp/new/findutils/find.c
>--- /tmp/old/findutils/find.c	2007-12-06 10:04:10.000000000 +0100
>+++ /tmp/new/findutils/find.c	2007-12-06 12:49:21.000000000 +0100
>@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@
> #define ACTS(name, arg...) typedef struct { action a; arg; } action_##name;
> #define ACTF(name)         static int func_##name(const char *fileName, struct stat *statbuf, action_##name* ap)
>                          ACTS(print)
>-                         ACTS(name,  const char *pattern;)
>+                         ACTS(name,  const char *pattern; int iname;)

this param should be one of bool, smalluint or smallint, depending on
what is smaller (iff it makes a difference in this spot).

thanks,