Hi,
On Thursday 28 December 2006 22:05, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> How to add some warning prints?
Simple, see the attached patch.
> And what's the problem with changing the generated files?
> There doesn't seem to be much activity in this area, and the noise of
> changing the generated files
Hi,
On Thursday 28 December 2006 22:05, Adrian Bunk wrote:
How to add some warning prints?
Simple, see the attached patch.
And what's the problem with changing the generated files?
There doesn't seem to be much activity in this area, and the noise of
changing the generated files doesn't
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 06:53:22PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > >
> > > Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use
> > > "requires" for
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 06:53:22PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use
requires for dependencies in Kconfig
Hi,
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> > Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use
> > "requires" for dependencies in Kconfig files.
> >...
>
> Considering that noone uses it, what about
Hi,
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use
requires for dependencies in Kconfig files.
...
Considering that noone uses it, what about the patch below
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 01:46:27PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > p.s. i didn't look closely enough to see if your patch took out
> > support for both "depends" *and* "requires". at this point,
> > neither of those are necessary anymore -- it's all
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 01:46:27PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > >
> > > Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use
> > > "requires" for dependencies in
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> > Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use
> > "requires" for dependencies in Kconfig files.
> >...
>
> Considering that noone uses it, what about the patch
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use
requires for dependencies in Kconfig files.
...
Considering that noone uses it, what about the patch below to
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 01:46:27PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:59AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
Remove the note in the documentation that suggests people can use
requires for dependencies in Kconfig files.
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 01:46:27PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
p.s. i didn't look closely enough to see if your patch took out
support for both depends *and* requires. at this point,
neither of those are necessary anymore -- it's all depends on
12 matches
Mail list logo
