On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 07:30:18PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> I hear ya. Remember the 2.1.1xx days? Linus looked at the relatively
> mature "uusb" project and basically said "Wow, what a load of crap, the
> usb spec isn't *nearly* this complex." Then he spent a weekend hacking
> up an e
[Brendan J Simon]
> Thanks for that information. Looks like Kai's work will/may
> eventually do what I want but when will it be mainstream, that is the
> question.
If by "mainstream" you mean "in 2.4", probably never. There is just no
motivation to backport it, and I doubt Marcelo would accept
Hi,
I'm getting the following error message.
How can I determine where the actual problem is?
Will Greg's gcml2 syntax checker find this?
(I'll find out tomorrow.)
Preparing scripts: functions,
parsing.scripts/Menuconfig:
./MCmenu73: line 71: syntax erro
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 10:01:20PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > Now it's testing time..
[...]
You must be missing some of the changes (My first push to bkbits was
incomplete, since I did inadvertently edit Makefile without checking it
out, I do that
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > -obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI_INTERPRETER) := $(patsubst %.c,%.o,$(wildcard *.c))
> > +obj-y := dsfield.o dsmthdat.o dsopcode.o dswexec.o dswscope.o \
> > +dsmethod.o dsobject.o dsutils.o dswload.o dswstate.o
>
> Should that have been:
> obj-$(CONFI
Le jeu 03/10/2002 à 04:59, Kai Germaschewski a écrit :
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd appreciate to get comments on the appended patch. It's mostly cleanups
> and the like, but the interesting part is the last cset, which is actually
> fairly small:
>
> 14 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>
Le jeu 03/10/2002 à 16:56, Kai Germaschewski a écrit :
> > This would avoid recursive make, which isn't really a good idea (even if
> > it's used widely). Here is a good agument about that:
> > http://www.cse.iitb.ac.in/~soumen/teach/cs699a1999/make.html
>
> I think I heard that before, but I wo
On 3 Oct 2002, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> Could you do instead:
>
> include subdir/Makefile
> ?
It's not quite that easy, unfortunately ;(
> This would avoid recursive make, which isn't really a good idea (even if
> it's used widely). Here is a good agument about that:
> http://www.cse.iitb.
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> Which top dir, src or obj? Most end users will expect obj topdir.
> More on that below.
Yes, I think obj topdir is the way to go - and you're right, it can be
made work mostly with vpath and does not need much more.
> > So gcc/ld/.. are now called
Peter Samuelson wrote:
>Well, there's http://www.??.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.5/ChangLog-*,
>search for "kai@". He seems to have started in 2.5.7.
>
>Off the top of my head, the main kbuild2.5 features 2.5.40 *doesn't*
>have would be:
>
>* separate source and object trees - but see below
>
[Brendan J Simon]
> Is there a site that documents the changes the Kai has made or is
> making ?
Well, there's http://www.??.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.5/ChangLog-*,
search for "kai@". He seems to have started in 2.5.7.
Off the top of my head, the main kbuild2.5 features 2.5.40 *doesn't*
h
11 matches
Mail list logo
