Re: CML1 cleanup patch, take 2

From: Jeff Garzik (jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com)
Date: Mon Mar 26 2001 - 14:52:07 EST

Next message: Jeff Garzik: "Re: CML1 cleanup patch, take 3"
Previous message: Martin Dalecki: "Re: 64-bit block sizes on 32-bit systems"
In reply to: Tom Rini: "Re: CML1 cleanup patch, take 2"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 09:50:53AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > PPC guys: this is a gratuitous renaming change that is not required.
> > If you have been following the "CML1 cleanup patch" thread, you see that
> > Eric is blindly dictating policy when he says that CONFIG_[0-9] needs to
> > be cleaned up.

> The counter point to this is what does "CONFIG_6xx" or 8xx mean? It's as bad
> as CONFIG_Mxxx imho :)

No argument.. :) I definitely encourage namespace cleanup in 2.5 -- but
please don't change an identifier just because it begins with a numeric
prefix... Change it because it needs to be changed.

Best regards,

Jeff

-- 
Jeff Garzik       | May you have warm words on a cold evening,
Building 1024     | a full moon on a dark night,
MandrakeSoft      | and a smooth road all the way to your door.
-
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/

Next message: Jeff Garzik: "Re: CML1 cleanup patch, take 3"
Previous message: Martin Dalecki: "Re: 64-bit block sizes on 32-bit systems"
In reply to: Tom Rini: "Re: CML1 cleanup patch, take 2"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 31 2001 - 21:00:14 EST