Re: [patch] make dnotify compile-time configurable

[Randy.Dunlap]

On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 13:30:08 -0400 Robert Love wrote:

| On Fri, 2004-10-01 at 12:27 -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
| 
| > > In this case I offer A or A&B.
| > 
| > The configurable dnotify patch makes sense on its own and is perhaps
| > less contentious. Push it first and resolve the conflicts with inotify
| > later..
| 
| ..the A above is dnotify by itself.  All I said--and I don't know why
| anyone questioned it--is that I want to put dnotify's configurability in
| the inotify patch.  They make sense together, and the patches conflict
| anyways.  I can do this.

You can do that.  Go ahead.
Even if it isn't clear that they make sense together.
Lots of patches conflict, but that's no grand reason to combine them.

| CONFIG_DNOTIFY makes sense either way, on its own or (more so) with
| inotify, and I already posted the patch separately.
| 
| Why are we even talking about this?!?

I'm going quiet on it...


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