If you eliminate the version info how would someone test DAT 1.3 code? Is support for 1.3 just supposed to magically appear in the mainline at some future date without intermediate testing?
On 6/14/05, James Lentini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think this is a good change. If we trim the dat_provider_info > structure down to just an IA name, then we should be able to remove it > all together. We don't have to do that on this pass though. > > I have a question about the change you've proposed for the makefile: > > On Sat, 11 Jun 2005, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Index: dat/Makefile > > =================================================================== > > --- dat/Makefile (revision 2588) > > +++ dat/Makefile (working copy) > > @@ -1,7 +1,6 @@ > > > > EXTRA_CFLAGS += \ > > - -Idrivers/dat \ > > - -Werror > > + -I$(obj) > > Is $(obj) the directory containing the object files (drivers/dat)? > > Is the -Werror flag already being setup by kbuild? > > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_DAT) += dat.o > > > _______________________________________________ > openib-general mailing list > [email protected] > http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general > > To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general > _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
