Re: in2000

From: Jeff Garzik (jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com)
Date: Mon Mar 20 2000 - 11:41:09 EST

Next message: Jesse Pollard: "Re: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...?"
Previous message: Andre Hedrick: "Re: Booting to >8GB..."
In reply to: Philip Blundell: "Re: in2000"
Next in thread: Philip Blundell: "Re: in2000"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Philip Blundell wrote:
>
> In message <20000319181942.A1788@thepuffingroup.com>, willy@thepuffingroup.com
> writes:
> >On Sun, Mar 19, 2000 at 08:51:59PM +0000, Philip Blundell wrote:
> >> This driver also contains i386 assembler. Luckily, there are generic
> >> equivalents provided too, so just a gentle nudge in the right direction is
> >> enough.
> >> +#ifdef __i386__
> >
> >i thought CONFIG_X86 was preferred these days?
>
> On what basis?
>
> CONFIG_X86 is longer, uglier, requires <linux/config.h> to be included (and
> hence generates an extra dependency).

Is '__i386__' guaranteed to -exactly the same- platforms that CONFIG_X86
covers?

-- Jeff Garzik | Tact is the ability to tell a man Building 1024 | he has an open mind when he has a MandrakeSoft, Inc. | hole in his head. (-random fortune)

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Jesse Pollard: "Re: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...?"
Previous message: Andre Hedrick: "Re: Booting to >8GB..."
In reply to: Philip Blundell: "Re: in2000"
Next in thread: Philip Blundell: "Re: in2000"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:00:30 EST