From: Thomas Graf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 22:23:41 +0100
> * jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-04 16:07
> > On Mon, 2006-04-12 at 19:00 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:
> > > * jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-04 12:48
> >
> > > > We can resolve that by uping the version for the contr
* jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-04 16:07
> On Mon, 2006-04-12 at 19:00 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:
> > * jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-04 12:48
>
> > > We can resolve that by uping the version for the controller.
> > > User will use that a signal.
> >
> > Good idea, makes me happy :-) pleas
On Mon, 2006-04-12 at 19:00 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:
> * jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-04 12:48
> > We can resolve that by uping the version for the controller.
> > User will use that a signal.
>
> Good idea, makes me happy :-) please do that in your patch as well.
Ok, here she goes...
If
* jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-04 12:48
> On Mon, 2006-04-12 at 17:31 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:
> > * jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-04 08:01
> > > The savings bytes is one aspect; the other is the cleanliness.
> > > transfering a boolean in that many bits is a little of overkill.
> > > I t
On Mon, 2006-04-12 at 17:31 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:
> * jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-04 08:01
> > The savings bytes is one aspect; the other is the cleanliness.
> > transfering a boolean in that many bits is a little of overkill.
> > I think it is better to fix it now than later.
> > I know
* jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-04 08:01
> The savings bytes is one aspect; the other is the cleanliness.
> transfering a boolean in that many bits is a little of overkill.
> I think it is better to fix it now than later.
> I know you mentioned libnl uses it. But that is something you can chang
On Mon, 2006-04-12 at 10:20 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:
> * jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-02 06:56
> >
> > Dave,
> > If there is no objections on this approach, please apply this patch.
> > Against net-2.6.20
> >
> > cheers,
> > jamal
>
> > This patch moves command capabilities to command flag
* jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-12-02 06:56
>
> Dave,
> If there is no objections on this approach, please apply this patch.
> Against net-2.6.20
>
> cheers,
> jamal
> This patch moves command capabilities to command flags. Other than
> being cleaner, saves several bytes.
Is it worth to save t
Dave,
If there is no objections on this approach, please apply this patch.
Against net-2.6.20
cheers,
jamal
This patch moves command capabilities to command flags. Other than
being cleaner, saves several bytes.
Signed-off-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
commit b6ac8f41bdd2edd9d215e
