On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 10:33:05AM +0200, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> Paul Mundt wrote:
> >Well, Sugioka-san has 3.04 and 2.97 binaries, but nothing beyond that.
> >On the other hand, we're not even realistically able to build the kernel
> >with anything that old, so it's likely not even worth bothering with.
> >
> >Given that, and the fact we don't have a test case that manages to trip
> >up the logic, we may as well just kill it off. The logic has been
> >completely inverted from day one also, so it's unlikely anyone seriously
> >tested or depended on this in the first place. If there were compiler
> >issues earlier on, the inverted logic would obviously not have fixed this
> >either. So, how about this?
> >
> Absolutely agreed. That's what I was thinking.
> Please commit.
>
Done!
_______________________________________________
uClibc mailing list
[email protected]
http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
