[kbuild-devel] Re: Announce: Kernel Build for 2.5, Release 2.0 is available

2002-04-05 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! Nice, but what about decrypted version? > -BEGIN PGP MESSAGE- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 > > owGNVk2PG0UQzYcQWUsWivIHKocku5J3bG/2I+tsEsiSBJPdECUBkWN7psfueGZ6 > 1N2zXgdxQAgJCQ4cOSGuCHELd5AQF04IDvkDHCCIn4B41TNjeyOCiLTRbk9X1atX > r6r6s+

[kbuild-devel] Re: Disgusted with kbuild developers

2002-03-01 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > >>. A Microsoft engineer wrote scripts/Configure. For three years, I have > >> lived in fear that Microsoft would notice this fact and use it to attack > >> Linux through public relations channels or legal means. They haven't > >> yet, > >> so I have been wrong so far. > >> > > > >Teehee

[kbuild-devel] Re: Disgusted with kbuild developers

2002-02-19 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > . A Microsoft engineer wrote scripts/Configure. For three years, I have > lived in fear that Microsoft would notice this fact and use it to attack > Linux through public relations channels or legal means. They haven't yet, > so I have been wrong so far. What's problem with Microsof

[kbuild-devel] Re: CML2 with python1

2001-12-17 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi > > But it _is_ entirely practical to run CML2 with a bog-standard python > > 1.5 interpreter. I just did a search/replace for the python2-ism's like > > > > +==> = + , and > > .() => string.(, ) > > > > Worked around some missing functionality in the older shlex and curses

Re: [kbuild-devel] Configure.help entries wanted

2001-05-27 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > > > I have some code which could become the basis for such a thing. > > > It's a touch panel driver for the DMIDA but it also has a device- > > > independent layer which does supersampling, scaling, provides > > > raw and cooked Linux Input interfaces, and a /proc interface to > > > allow

[kbuild-devel] Re: CML2 design philosophy heads-up

2001-05-17 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > > Not all cards have all features, not all users wants to enable all > > features. > > Yes, I understand that. You're not reading the derivations correctly. > Let's take an example: > > derive MVME147_SCSI from MVME147 & SCSI > > This doesn't turn on MVME147_SCSI on every MVME147 board.

[kbuild-devel] Re: Request for comment -- a better attribution system

2001-04-27 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > > The real problem is that large part of the kernel has no permanent > > maintainers. Which makes the whole (overdesigned) idea completely moot. > > One of the problems this ___ kbuild-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourcefor