Personal I would like to see kbuild-2.5 included ASAP. Among other stuff
I like the compressed output during compilation.
So do I. I like the clean design of kbuild-2.5 and i'm more than fine with
the overall speed.
I vote for inclusion in 2.5. As small as my vote can be
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 11:22:00AM +0100, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
Eric S. Raymond wrote:
kbuild team members: Dirk Hohndel has volunteered to have a chat with
Linus about the CML2/kbuild-2.5 transition (and, implicitly, the status
and role of the kbuild team).
Please inform him of:
Tom Rini [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Right now symbols without a help entry still won't show up unless
CONFIG_ADVANCED is set (right?). And as a case in point (which I told
Eric not to do), CONFIG_PPC_RTC is currently a derived symbol instead of
being a question (and if I read the derivation right,
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 10:51:18AM -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Tom Rini [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Right now symbols without a help entry still won't show up unless
CONFIG_ADVANCED is set (right?). And as a case in point (which I told
Eric not to do), CONFIG_PPC_RTC is currently a derived
On Friday 15 February 2002 09:04, Tom Rini wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 11:22:00AM +0100, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
[much sippage]
The big problem in CML2 is python (and python2).
This is a red herring. People bitch and moan about it, but it's not a
problem.
Agreed, but it is a minor
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 09:33:01AM -0700, Steven Cole wrote:
On Friday 15 February 2002 09:04, Tom Rini wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 11:22:00AM +0100, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
[much sippage]
The big problem in CML2 is python (and python2).
This is a red herring. People bitch and
Tom Rini [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It's not so much the look feel (which seems to have been copied well
by now), but policy changes.
I'm glad you think I got the look and feel OK. If I were bug-for-bug
compatible with the old system, there would hardly be any point, would
there?
I'm not ignoring
Tom Rini [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Strictly stated implication for strictly stated implication?
Can't do that, either. One major reason is the single-apex menu tree.
Another is that the old language didn't carry enough information to
do side-effect forcing properly.
What invariant or behavior are
Good day, all,
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Tom Rini [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Perhaps that wasn't quite the right words. Statement for Statement and
no additional restrictions on questions.
Statement for statement is not going to happen, simply because the structure
of the
On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 11:22:00AM +0100, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
[Not a single word about the battle ongoing at LKLM...]
kbuild-2.5:
It does the right things! And this should be enought to tell you that
it should be included in the next kernels.
When Keith brought up the inclusion of
kbuild team members: Dirk Hohndel has volunteered to have a chat with
Linus about the CML2/kbuild-2.5 transition (and, implicitly, the status
and role of the kbuild team).
Please inform him of:
1) your technical judgement and opinions about CML2 and kbuild-2.5
2) the problems with the present
11 matches
Mail list logo
