On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 00:04:58 +0100 Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 03:36:40PM -0500, chas williams - CONTRACTOR wrote: > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,Adrian Bunk writes: > > >Letting CONFIG_BRIDGE depend on CONFIG_ATM doesn't sound like a good > > >idea, since I doubt all people using the Bridge code require ATM > > >support. > > > > how about the following? > >... > > Looks good Ditto
_______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
