On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 07:44:13PM +0800, Joseph Lee wrote: > Hello, > > Thanks for reply. > > >why do you create a full new copy of a config, this is certainly not > needed. > An option in standard config file must be disable to pass compilation. I am > not very familiar with how these options are used. This is the way I found. > It's a little ugly indeed. I will try another way.
it is unneeded. Please don't add more noise. see https://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernel for docs > >dude break up this patch in logic parts. this an unreadable mess. > Sorry for that, I gather everything in one patch make this patch a little > big. Should I send them in different parts? of course ! nobody is going to seriously review a 100k patch. > >I don't get why a clang patch should patch a fs!? > You mean patch files in fs? This is for removing valais that clang doesn't > support. I do not care about whatever patchset you want to promote, our policy concerning that is pretty clear: https://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelPatchAcceptanceGuidelines Hence if you want any non bugfix patches, get them upstream accepted first. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
