Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Feb 2003 12:27:55 -0800 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [BK PATCH] klibc for 2.5.62 |
| |
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 09:09:35PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 11:39:07AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > usr/lib/arch/arm/MCONFIG | 26 > Any good reasons for such a screaming name? > makefile.config eventually.
Ask Peter :)
> > usr/lib/arch/arm/Makefile.inc | 31 > > No extension is used for arch/arm/Makefile > Why does klibc differ in this respect? > [An answer that tell me that arch/arm/Makefile should > change is fine with me..]
Ask Russell :)
> > usr/lib/makeerrlist.pl | 80 > > usr/lib/socketcalls.pl | 75 > > This mixture of code and scripts to generate code hursts my eye. > What about usr/scripts/.
But they are the scripts used to build the code in usr/lib. I don't care where they go, that's just where they were in the klibc tarball.
> I assume you do not want them in scripts/
Yeah, I wouldn't think they should go their either.
thanks,
greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |