On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 14:38:53 +0200
Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed 2006-09-20 14:20:19, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 02:12:30PM +0200, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
> >
> > > But I think those two lines do not hurt and saves packagers (me;) the
> > > bother of having
On Wed 2006-09-20 14:20:19, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 02:12:30PM +0200, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
>
> > But I think those two lines do not hurt and saves packagers (me;) the
> > bother of having to edit the makefile everytime they sync with upstream.
>
> ACK. I also have to edit
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 02:12:30PM +0200, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
> But I think those two lines do not hurt and saves packagers (me;) the
> bother of having to edit the makefile everytime they sync with upstream.
ACK. I also have to edit out the mknod in my build. This option saves me
a local patch.
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 12:44:46 +0200
Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Many people have udev, which will make /dev/snapshot dynamically if
> > support is available in the kernel. And if it didn't, making it from the
> > Makefile wouldn't be a solution because it would disappear on
On Wednesday, 20 September 2006 12:01, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Many people have udev, which will make /dev/snapshot dynamically if
> support is available in the kernel. And if it didn't, making it from the
> Makefile wouldn't be a solution because it would disappear on the next
> reboot.
> T
Hi!
> Many people have udev, which will make /dev/snapshot dynamically if
> support is available in the kernel. And if it didn't, making it from the
> Makefile wouldn't be a solution because it would disappear on the next
> reboot.
> This patch adds another CONFIG option to the Makefile to not mak
