[PATCH] realpath: SUSv4 compliant

[Bernhard Reutner-Fischer]

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 03:24:58PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
>On Thursday 19 November 2009 02:46:38 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 06:31:40PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
>> >Why  is the __nonnull(2) still there?  Isn't the point of this to ensure
>> > that the second argument _can_ be null?
>>
>> Please read the whole thread,

>Ah, I see, the second patch you posted in reply to Peter's comments had 
>unrelated changes made silently, and this was one.  My bad, sorry I missed 
>that.

I first sent a diff of the wrong tree, i.e. Mike's original note instead
of a working patch.

What do you mean by unrelated?
Unrelated as in making realpath SUSv4 compliant?

*shrug*