Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-16 Thread David Brownell
On Thursday 15 February 2007 9:12 pm, David Brownell wrote: > On Thursday 15 February 2007 8:38 pm, Len Brown wrote: > > > So I've taken Andi's advice and checked in the patches below. > > OK; that simplifies things for me, good! I can discard that patch > (broken by Andi's pcspkr change

Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-16 Thread David Brownell
On Thursday 15 February 2007 9:12 pm, David Brownell wrote: On Thursday 15 February 2007 8:38 pm, Len Brown wrote: So I've taken Andi's advice and checked in the patches below. OK; that simplifies things for me, good! I can discard that patch (broken by Andi's pcspkr change anyway), stop

Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-15 Thread David Brownell
On Thursday 15 February 2007 8:38 pm, Len Brown wrote: > So I've taken Andi's advice and checked in the patches below. OK; that simplifies things for me, good! I can discard that patch (broken by Andi's pcspkr change anyway), stop worring about whether most folk will even see that driver, and

Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-15 Thread Len Brown
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 18:47, David Brownell wrote: > On Wednesday 14 February 2007 3:20 pm, Len Brown wrote: > > > > > > I still need to resubmit the patch, for X86_PC, which defines the platform > > > device in the (common) case where PNPACPI isn't defined. > > > > CONFIG_PNPACPI=y is

Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-15 Thread Len Brown
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 18:47, David Brownell wrote: On Wednesday 14 February 2007 3:20 pm, Len Brown wrote: I still need to resubmit the patch, for X86_PC, which defines the platform device in the (common) case where PNPACPI isn't defined. CONFIG_PNPACPI=y is not the common

Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-15 Thread David Brownell
On Thursday 15 February 2007 8:38 pm, Len Brown wrote: So I've taken Andi's advice and checked in the patches below. OK; that simplifies things for me, good! I can discard that patch (broken by Andi's pcspkr change anyway), stop worring about whether most folk will even see that driver, and

Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-14 Thread David Brownell
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 3:20 pm, Len Brown wrote: > > > > I still need to resubmit the patch, for X86_PC, which defines the platform > > device in the (common) case where PNPACPI isn't defined. > > CONFIG_PNPACPI=y is not the common case? It's certainly not in the defconfig for x86-64.

Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-14 Thread Len Brown
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 14:55, David Brownell wrote: > On Wednesday 14 February 2007 10:09 am, Dave Jones wrote: > > This option is useful for all of the X86 subarchs afaik (and especially > > X86_GENERICARCH). > > You're right ... _potentially_ useful, which is the same standard used > in

Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-14 Thread David Brownell
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 10:09 am, Dave Jones wrote: > This option is useful for all of the X86 subarchs afaik (and especially > X86_GENERICARCH). You're right ... _potentially_ useful, which is the same standard used in most of the other cases. The "X86_PC" is debris from an early version

loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-14 Thread Dave Jones
This option is useful for all of the X86 subarchs afaik (and especially X86_GENERICARCH). Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- linux-2.6.20.noarch/drivers/rtc/Kconfig~2007-02-14 13:07:07.0 -0500 +++ linux-2.6.20.noarch/drivers/rtc/Kconfig 2007-02-14

loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-14 Thread Dave Jones
This option is useful for all of the X86 subarchs afaik (and especially X86_GENERICARCH). Signed-off-by: Dave Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- linux-2.6.20.noarch/drivers/rtc/Kconfig~2007-02-14 13:07:07.0 -0500 +++ linux-2.6.20.noarch/drivers/rtc/Kconfig 2007-02-14

Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-14 Thread David Brownell
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 10:09 am, Dave Jones wrote: This option is useful for all of the X86 subarchs afaik (and especially X86_GENERICARCH). You're right ... _potentially_ useful, which is the same standard used in most of the other cases. The X86_PC is debris from an early version of

Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-14 Thread Len Brown
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 14:55, David Brownell wrote: On Wednesday 14 February 2007 10:09 am, Dave Jones wrote: This option is useful for all of the X86 subarchs afaik (and especially X86_GENERICARCH). You're right ... _potentially_ useful, which is the same standard used in most of

Re: loosen dependancy on rtc cmos

2007-02-14 Thread David Brownell
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 3:20 pm, Len Brown wrote: I still need to resubmit the patch, for X86_PC, which defines the platform device in the (common) case where PNPACPI isn't defined. CONFIG_PNPACPI=y is not the common case? It's certainly not in the defconfig for x86-64. And it's