Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 30 Nov 2008 23:29:14 -0500 (EST) | From | Len Brown <> | Subject | Re: drivers/x86 (Was: Re: linux-next: Tree for November 28 (misc/tc1100)) |
| |
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > > > Hi Len, > > > > On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:55:08 -0800 Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > > > make[2]: *** No rule to make target `drivers/misc/tc1100-wmi.o', needed by `drivers/misc/built-in.o'. > > > > > > on allmodconfig & allyesconfig for i386. > > > > > > On, moved to drivers/x86/. Someone needs to clean up drivers/misc/Makefile. > > > > Just wondering where the move to drivers/x86 was discussed, (reviewed > > and tested) and why the change is in the acpi tree and not the x86 > > tree? > > it will all conflict with pending bits in the x86 tree, so i'd prefer if > Len did this atomically after 2.6.29-rc1, without it having this > long-term breakage effect.
Is linux-next running into a conflict between x86 and the acpi tree today?
thanks, -Len
| |