On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 10:48:21AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 16:43:48 +0200 Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > And your approach could easily result in code paths never tested in
> > -mm or -rc kernels exploding in the actual release.
>
> yep, we need to ensure t
On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 04:29:27PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Jun 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>
> > The below patch suffers from the problem that changing the
> > value of DEVELKERNEL in the Makefile are not automatically
> > reflected in autoconf.h.
>
> Well you are restating what
On Sat, 2 Jun 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> The below patch suffers from the problem that changing the
> value of DEVELKERNEL in the Makefile are not automatically
> reflected in autoconf.h.
Well you are restating what is in the description. See below.
> We need to get this fixed before merging th
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 09:17:53PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> This introduces
>
> CONFIG_DEVELKERNEL
>
> If CONFIG_DEVELKERNEL is set then this is a development kernel.
> Otherwise the kernel to be built is a a production kernel.
The below patch suffers from the problem that changing the
On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 16:43:48 +0200 Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And your approach could easily result in code paths never tested in
> -mm or -rc kernels exploding in the actual release.
yep, we need to ensure that DEVELKERNEL gets turned off a few weeks
before final release.
-
To unsu
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 09:17:53PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> This introduces
>
> CONFIG_DEVELKERNEL
>
> If CONFIG_DEVELKERNEL is set then this is a development kernel.
> Otherwise the kernel to be built is a a production kernel.
>...
I have two problems with your patch:
First, there wi
6 matches
Mail list logo
