Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Fix detection of uname failure

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 14:39:56 -0700

Johannes Schindelin <[email-masked]> writes:

> On 2015-07-17 19:09, Charles Bailey wrote:
>> From: Charles Bailey <[email-masked]>
>> 
>> According to POSIX specification uname must return -1 on failure and a
>> non-negative value on success. Although many implementations do return 0
>> on success it is valid to return any positive value for success.  In
>> particular, Solaris returns 1.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Charles Bailey <[email-masked]>
>
> Acked-by: Johannes Schindelin <[email-masked]>

I'd s/Ack/Review/; as the original is not your code but you are well
qualified (and have my trust) to judge the change to this codepath
;-)

Thanks.