[Kai Germaschewski] > I completely agree, though it weakens my argument about consistency ;)
Heh. > Now we only need to convince Peter. I just sent you a patch with all [M], so I guess you can consider me sufficiently convinced. I'm not, really, but it's hardly an important issue, so I figured I'd stop wasting all of our time. Besides, I am outnumbered 2-1. (: I think the world would have been better off if 5 years ago we had decided to come up with a new suffix (say ".ko") for kernel modules. Sure they are object files, but they are *more* than that. (And some day we may want to use ... who knows? shared libraries?) The biggest advantage would have been avoiding crap like "sr_mod.o" in favor of the much saner "sr.ko".... As a side effect, this would have made the present issue go away, because there would be no need for the additional information: .ko == final module, .o == not final module. At this point I suspect it is about 5 years too late to propose my .ko change. Too much user confusion. Too bad. Peter ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: ApacheCon, November 18-21 in Las Vegas (supported by COMDEX), the only Apache event to be fully supported by the ASF. http://www.apachecon.com _______________________________________________ kbuild-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kbuild-devel
