On Sun, 28 May 2000, Kenneth C. Arnold wrote:
> On Sun, May 28, 2000 at 07:44:08PM -0400, Brian Gerst wrote:
> > "Kenneth C. Arnold" wrote:
> > > btw, do a grep of the source tree for LINUX_VERSION_CODE. The 2.2 checks are
> > > explainable, but I see in that very driver:
> > >
> > > #if LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= LinuxVersionCode(2,3,17)
> > > #include <linux/spinlock.h>
> > > #elif LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= LinuxVersionCode(2,1,93)
> > > #include <asm/spinlock.h>
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > Why keep that? Should this get cleaned up? And also there are several ways
> > > used to check the versions -- LinuxKernelVersion(x,y,z),
> > > Linux_Kernel_Version(x,y,z), and the straight numbers in some cases,
> > > to name a few. Clean these up? Okay, I'll work on it.
> >
> > I already have patches for this. I have just been waiting for 2.5
> > before submitting them.
>
> Great... somebody always already did what I want to do...
>
> Why wait for 2.5?
<irony>
Hmmm. I do seem to recall that someone on this list started off this
discussion by saying that too many changes goes into each major release
and that the code-freezes are not honoured properly?!
</irony>
/David
_ _
// David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 21:00:21 EST