patch: fix of compiler warnings

[Harald Welte]

On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:19:55AM +0100, Holger Freyther wrote:
> On Monday 16 November 2009 18:52:32 Andreas.Eversberg wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/openbsc/src/bsc_init.c b/openbsc/src/bsc_init.c
> > index 815fe2b..3b451b1 100644
> > --- a/openbsc/src/bsc_init.c
> > +++ b/openbsc/src/bsc_init.c
> > @@ -433,8 +433,8 @@ int nm_state_event(enum nm_evt evt, u_int8_t
> > obj_class, void *obj,
> >  static int sw_activ_rep(struct msgb *mb)
> >  {
> >  	struct abis_om_fom_hdr *foh = msgb_l3(mb);
> > -	struct gsm_bts *bts = mb->trx->bts;
> > -	struct gsm_bts_trx *trx = gsm_bts_trx_num(bts,
> > foh->obj_inst.trx_nr);
> > +//	struct gsm_bts *bts = mb->trx->bts;
> > +//	struct gsm_bts_trx *trx = gsm_bts_trx_num(bts,
> > foh->obj_inst.trx_nr);
> 
> was this intentional? Is the warning that these are unused? In this case we 
> will just nuke the variable declaration.

they are still there to remind me that we should switch back to move some of the initialization into the software activate report (see the other mail)

-- 
- Harald Welte <laforge at gnumonks.org>           http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
                                                  (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)